IF 3.4 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Clinical Epidemiology Pub Date : 2024-12-10 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/CLEP.S471335
Katrine Hjuler Lund, Cecilia Hvitfeldt Fuglsang, Sigrun Alba Johannesdottir Schmidt, Morten Schmidt
{"title":"Cardiovascular Data Quality in the Danish National Patient Registry (1977-2024): A Systematic Review.","authors":"Katrine Hjuler Lund, Cecilia Hvitfeldt Fuglsang, Sigrun Alba Johannesdottir Schmidt, Morten Schmidt","doi":"10.2147/CLEP.S471335","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The increasing use of routinely collected health data for research puts great demands on data quality. The Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) is renowned for its longitudinal data registration since 1977 and is a commonly used data source for cardiovascular epidemiology.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To provide an overview and examine determinants of the cardiovascular data quality in the DNPR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a systematic literature search of MEDLINE (PubMed) and the Danish Medical Journal, and identified papers validating cardiovascular variables in the DNPR during 1977-2024. We also included papers from reference lists, citations, journal e-mail notifications, and colleagues. Measures of data quality included the positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We screened 2,049 papers to identify 63 relevant papers, including a total of 229 cardiovascular variables. Of these, 200 variables assessed diagnoses, 24 assessed treatments (10 surgeries and 14 other treatments), and 5 assessed examinations. The data quality varied substantially between variables. Overall, the PPV was ≥90% for 36% of variables, 80-89% for 26%, 70-79% for 16%, 60-69% for 7%, 50-59% for 4%, and <50% for 11% of variables. The predictive value was generally higher for treatments (PPV≥95% for 92%) and examinations (PPV≥95% for 100%) than for diagnoses (PPV≥80% for 71%). Moreover, the PPV varied for individual diagnoses depending on the algorithm used to identify them. Key determinants for validity were patient contact type (inpatient vs outpatient), diagnosis type (primary vs secondary), setting (university vs regional hospitals), and calendar year.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The validity of cardiovascular variables in the DNPR is high for treatments and examinations but varies considerably between individual diagnoses depending on the algorithm used to define them.</p>","PeriodicalId":10362,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Epidemiology","volume":"16 ","pages":"865-900"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11645903/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/CLEP.S471335","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在研究中越来越多地使用常规收集的健康数据,这对数据质量提出了很高的要求。丹麦国家患者登记处(Danish National Patient Registry,DNPR)因其自 1977 年以来的纵向数据登记而闻名,是心血管流行病学常用的数据源:概述 DNPR 中的心血管数据质量并研究其决定因素:我们对 MEDLINE (PubMed) 和《丹麦医学杂志》进行了系统的文献检索,并确定了 1977-2024 年间验证 DNPR 中心血管变量的论文。我们还从参考文献列表、引文、期刊电子邮件通知和同事处收录了相关论文。数据质量的衡量标准包括阳性预测值(PPV)、阴性预测值、灵敏度和特异性:我们筛选了 2,049 篇论文,确定了 63 篇相关论文,共包括 229 个心血管变量。其中,200 个变量评估了诊断,24 个变量评估了治疗(10 个手术和 14 个其他治疗),5 个变量评估了检查。不同变量的数据质量差异很大。总体而言,36%的变量的PPV≥90%,26%的变量的PPV≥80-89%,16%的变量的PPV≥70-79%,7%的变量的PPV≥60-69%,4%的变量的PPV≥50-59%:DNPR 中的心血管变量对治疗和检查的有效性很高,但不同诊断之间的有效性差异很大,这取决于用于定义这些变量的算法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cardiovascular Data Quality in the Danish National Patient Registry (1977-2024): A Systematic Review.

Background: The increasing use of routinely collected health data for research puts great demands on data quality. The Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR) is renowned for its longitudinal data registration since 1977 and is a commonly used data source for cardiovascular epidemiology.

Objective: To provide an overview and examine determinants of the cardiovascular data quality in the DNPR.

Methods: We performed a systematic literature search of MEDLINE (PubMed) and the Danish Medical Journal, and identified papers validating cardiovascular variables in the DNPR during 1977-2024. We also included papers from reference lists, citations, journal e-mail notifications, and colleagues. Measures of data quality included the positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity.

Results: We screened 2,049 papers to identify 63 relevant papers, including a total of 229 cardiovascular variables. Of these, 200 variables assessed diagnoses, 24 assessed treatments (10 surgeries and 14 other treatments), and 5 assessed examinations. The data quality varied substantially between variables. Overall, the PPV was ≥90% for 36% of variables, 80-89% for 26%, 70-79% for 16%, 60-69% for 7%, 50-59% for 4%, and <50% for 11% of variables. The predictive value was generally higher for treatments (PPV≥95% for 92%) and examinations (PPV≥95% for 100%) than for diagnoses (PPV≥80% for 71%). Moreover, the PPV varied for individual diagnoses depending on the algorithm used to identify them. Key determinants for validity were patient contact type (inpatient vs outpatient), diagnosis type (primary vs secondary), setting (university vs regional hospitals), and calendar year.

Conclusion: The validity of cardiovascular variables in the DNPR is high for treatments and examinations but varies considerably between individual diagnoses depending on the algorithm used to define them.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Epidemiology
Clinical Epidemiology Medicine-Epidemiology
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
5.10%
发文量
169
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Epidemiology is an international, peer reviewed, open access journal. Clinical Epidemiology focuses on the application of epidemiological principles and questions relating to patients and clinical care in terms of prevention, diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment. Clinical Epidemiology welcomes papers covering these topics in form of original research and systematic reviews. Clinical Epidemiology has a special interest in international electronic medical patient records and other routine health care data, especially as applied to safety of medical interventions, clinical utility of diagnostic procedures, understanding short- and long-term clinical course of diseases, clinical epidemiological and biostatistical methods, and systematic reviews. When considering submission of a paper utilizing publicly-available data, authors should ensure that such studies add significantly to the body of knowledge and that they use appropriate validated methods for identifying health outcomes. The journal has launched special series describing existing data sources for clinical epidemiology, international health care systems and validation studies of algorithms based on databases and registries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信