SynthesisEuropean respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society2026
Validating exacerbations of asthma in electronic health records: a systematic review.
Synthesis in European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society, 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.
- SGLT2 Inhibitors and Asthma Exacerbation Risk Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Asthma: A Target Trial Emulation.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- Agreement Between ICD-10 Code-Only and Composite Definitions of Asthma Exacerbations in Electronic Health Records: A Multicenter Cohort Study in Taiwan, 2017-2023.Clinical epidemiology · 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
backgroundPrevious studies have shown that the algorithms and code lists used to define asthma exacerbations vary across different sources of data, if reported at all. Defining and validating asthma exacerbations in electronic health records (EHR) would help to improve future research on asthma using EHR by leading to more consistent and comparable evidence.
methodsWe systematically reviewed the literature to evaluate studies that define exacerbations of asthma in EHR and report which algorithms have the highest validity. An adapted version of the QUADAS-2 designed for this review was used to assess risk of bias.
resultsOf the studies yielded by the search, only five met the inclusion criteria. Eligible studies used algorithms that contained codes from versions or modifications of either the 9th or 10th revisions of the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health (ICD-9 or ICD-10), and validity scores varied. Using the ICD-9 code 493 within algorithms to detect asthma exacerbations, sensitivity scores varied from 44.8% to 91.28% and specificity was >85%. Using the ICD-9 code 493.xx as the principal and secondary diagnosis in claims data, validity measures were all >85%. Using the ICD-10 code J45, scores for sensitivity, specificity and negative predictive value were also all >85%.
conclusionsAlgorithms have been used to identify asthma exacerbations in EHR with varying degrees of validity. Algorithms including the ICD-9 code 493.xx or the ICD-10 code J45 to detect asthma exacerbations had high validity scores. However, there was a risk of bias in these studies and urgent work is needed using robust methods to validate definitions for future research using EHR.
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.