ArticleClinical kidney journal2026
Sensitivity and positive predictive value of diagnosis codes for acute kidney injury in Denmark.
Article in Clinical kidney journal, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Robotic vs. laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair in patients with chronic kidney disease: a propensity score-matched analysis.Journal of robotic surgery · 2026Article
- Exploring Risks of Adverse Drug Events From Single Drug to Three-Drug Combination.Clinical and translational science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is associated with increased morbidity and mortality but is likely underrecorded in health registers. This study examined the sensitivity and positive predictive value (PPV) of AKI diagnoses compared with laboratory-identified AKI. Methods: In this observational study we analysed data from the Danish National Patient Register and laboratory databases from January 2007 through November 2023. Diagnoses of AKI according to the International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) were compared with laboratory-identified AKI episodes defined by the Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) creatinine criteria. Sensitivity was defined as the proportion of laboratory-identified AKI episodes captured by ICD-10 codes within 30 days before or after the episode's index date and PPV was the proportion of ICD-10-coded AKI episodes confirmed by the KDIGO criteria within a ±30-day window. Analyses were stratified by sex, age, AKI stage, setting, comorbidity and short-term mortality. Results: A total of 947 209 laboratory-identified AKI episodes and 80 649 ICD-10-coded AKI episodes were included. Overall, sensitivity was 7.5% [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.4-7.5], varying by stage (4.0% for stage 1 versus 21.7% for stage 3) and setting (6.0% for hospital acquired versus 8.6% for community acquired). The overall PPV was 90.6% (95% CI 90.4-90.9), with little variation across subgroups. Conclusion: ICD-10 codes of AKI demonstrate a high PPV, ensuring accuracy in identifying true AKI episodes. However, the low sensitivity highlights a risk of underestimating AKI occurrence. Laboratory data should be prioritized for comprehensive AKI identification and potential biases addressed when relying on diagnosis codes in research.
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.