2016
DOI: 10.9778/cmajo.20160128
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Validity of Canadian discharge abstract data for hypertension and diabetes from 2002 to 2013

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 21 publications
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We selected patients aged 40 years or older because, according to Spanish studies, the prevalence of T2DM is very low under this age (<1%) [41, 42]. Furthermore, even if the validity of diabetes as a discharge diagnosis had been demonstrated in previous investigations, the possibility of miscoding T1DM as T2DM is higher in younger groups [43, 44]…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We selected patients aged 40 years or older because, according to Spanish studies, the prevalence of T2DM is very low under this age (<1%) [41, 42]. Furthermore, even if the validity of diabetes as a discharge diagnosis had been demonstrated in previous investigations, the possibility of miscoding T1DM as T2DM is higher in younger groups [43, 44]…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Between 2002 and 2013, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value ranged from 81% to 98% for diabetes and the corresponding kappa index scores ranged from 0.80 to 0.89. No significant differences in the validity of coding were found across age, gender or hospital location subgroups [ 47 ]. The only study conducted in Spain by Ribera et al found similar figures with a sensitivity of 55% and 97% specificity [ 43 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies have shown that case identification of chronic conditions (e.g. hypertension and diabetes) are valid and stable over time in Canadian administrative data when compared with clinical data sources (21)(22)(23)(24).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%