Clinical coding for negative appendicectomy was unreliable. Negative rates may be higher than suspected. This has implications for the validity of national database analyses. Using this form of data as a quality indictor for appendicitis should be reconsidered until its quality is improved.
GP notes in case-control studies of young women the diagnosis/pseudodiagnosis date were ignored, even if they referred to events before that date. The notes were abstracted onto a structured form and interviewers were instructed to use all information (including correspondence) in the notes. Where an item in the notes was undated, the abstractor used her judgment as to whether it happened before or after diagnosis/pseudodiagnosis date by using the chronology of the notes. Other sources of information kept by the GP (for example the notes of a woman's husband or children) were not abstracted.We wanted complete GP data on all eligible cases and their first selected controls, regardless of whether or not the interviews had been done. Where we were unable to interview a case, for whatever reason, permission was sought from the consultant and GP to abstract the information from her GP notes. Permission was sought from the GP, and if required by the GP, from the control also, to abstract the same information from her GP notes. If a first-selected control could not be interviewed for any reason, permission was also sought to abstract information from her GP notes even though a second (or subsequent) control had been successfully interviewed. Information was also sought from any family planning clinics that a woman recalled attending. The data from all sources were used to contruct the lifelong contraceptive calendar used for the main analyses of the study data.1 2
STATISTICAL METHODSAgreement between the interview and the GP data was measured by means of the kappa statistic.25 The analyses of breast cancer risk using interview data alone and GP data alone were carried out using multivariate logistic regression methods for individually matched case-control studies.6 Relative risks were estimated by odds ratios. Significance levels quoted are two-sided. Of the 755 first-selected controls, 675 (89%) were interviewed and the GP notes of 674 of these were abstracted. The 80 first controls not interviewed were replaced by second or subsequent choices and GP notes were abstracted for these also. Fifty three (66%) of the 80 firstselected controls who were not interviewed also had their GP notes abstracted. Reasons for not abstracting the remaining 27 sets of notes were GP refusal (15), control refusal (11), and failure to trace (1). We also abstracted 219 sets (99%) of notes for firstselected controls matched to the 222 noninterviewed cases whose notes had been successfully abstracted. (Subsequent controls were substituted for the three remaining control women who refused permission for note abstraction.)We compared information obtained from interview with that obtained from GP notes for the 754 pairs where both sets were available; one GP refused permission for abstraction. GP notes were abstracted for a total of 946 (90%)
Congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS) is a primary genetic and electrical disorder that increases risk for torsades de pointes, syncope, and sudden death. Post-pubertal women with LQTS require specialized multidisciplinary management before, during, and after pregnancy involving cardiology and obstetrics to reduce risk for cardiac events in themselves and their fetuses and babies. The risk of potentially life-threatening events is lower during pregnancy but increases significantly during the 9-month postpartum period. Treatment of women with LQTS with a preferred β-blocker at optimal doses along with close monitoring are indicated throughout pregnancy and during the high-risk postpartum period.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.