ArticleBMJ open2026
Development of phenotype algorithms for the detection of adverse events in electronic health record data: a multicentre study.
Article in BMJ open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo develop phenotype algorithms for the detection of adverse events (AEs) or AE-proxies in electronic health records (EHRs), accounting for varying data availability.
designMulticentre study conducted as part of the Use Case POLAR_MI (POLypharmacy, drug interActions, Risks) of the German Medical Informatics Initiative (MII).
settingGermany.
participantsMultidisciplinary teams from 10 German university sites within the MII.
interventionsNot applicable.
main outcome measuresLiterature- and consensus-based development and operationalisation of AE algorithms using structured EHR data, including a standardised, multicentre expert review process. Data categories used: International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision (ICD-10) codes for diagnoses; Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) codes and 'Pharmazentralnummern' (PZN; German eight-digit identification code for pharmaceutical products) for medications (used in the treatment of AEs); Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC) for laboratory values and medical findings; and 'Operationen- und Prozedurenschlüssel' (OPS; German procedure classification) codes for medical and surgical procedures.
resultsWe developed 82 algorithms for 48 AEs. Algorithms for the same AE varied by data categories or code selections. At the AE level, 31 AEs were covered exclusively by newly developed algorithms, and 17 AEs by at least one modified algorithm.Overall, 52 algorithms were based on a single data category, while 30 required multiple categories. ICD-10 codes were most commonly used (n=65 AE algorithms), followed by LOINC (n=27), ATC codes (n=18), OPS codes (n=11) and PZN (n=2). All phenotype algorithms were semantically modelled and can be executed using the publicly available Terminology- and Ontology-based Phenotyping (TOP) Framework, which supports export in various formats.
conclusionWe present a peer-reviewed set of algorithms for a large number of AEs, which can be implemented in structured routine electronic data sources and (pending validation studies) may support pharmacoepidemiologic research. The algorithms will be implementable across all 39 participating sites of the German MII. As a next step, we will empirically validate the algorithms against all information (including free text) contained in EHRs.
trial registrationNot applicable.
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.