ArticleJournal of the American College of Radiology : JACR2024
Development and Validation of an Electronic Adverse Event Model for Patient Safety Surveillance in Interventional Radiology.
Article in Journal of the American College of Radiology : JACR, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComprehensive adverse event (AE) surveillance programs in interventional radiology (IR) are rare. Our aim was to develop and validate a retrospective electronic surveillance model to identify outpatient IR procedures that are likely to have an AE, to support patient safety and quality improvement.
methodsWe identified outpatient IR procedures performed in the period from October 2017 to September 2019 from the Veterans Health Administration (n = 135,283) and applied electronic triggers based on posyprocedure care to flag cases with a potential AE. From the trigger-flagged cases, we randomly sampled n = 1,500 for chart review to identify AEs. We also randomly sampled n = 600 from the unflagged cases. Chart-reviewed cases were merged with patient, procedure, and facility factors to estimate a mixed-effects logistic regression model designed to predict whether an AE occurred. Using model fit and criterion validity, we determined the best predicted probability threshold to identify cases with a likely AE. We reviewed a random sample of 200 cases above the threshold and 100 cases from below the threshold from October 2019 to March 2020 (n = 20,849) for model validation.
resultsIn our development sample of mostly trigger-flagged cases, 444 of 2,096 cases (21.8%) had an AE. The optimal predicted probability threshold for a likely AE from our surveillance model was >50%, with positive predictive value of 68.9%, sensitivity of 38.3%, and specificity of 95.3%. In validation, chart-reviewed cases with AE probability >50% had a positive predictive value of 63% (n = 203). For the period from October 2017 to March 2020, the model identified approximately 70 IR cases per month that were likely to have an AE.
conclusionsThis electronic trigger-based approach to AE surveillance could be used for patient-safety reporting and quality review.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.