首页> 外文期刊>BMC Medical Research Methodology >Validation of diabetes mellitus and hypertension diagnosis in computerized medical records in primary health care
【24h】

Validation of diabetes mellitus and hypertension diagnosis in computerized medical records in primary health care

机译:在初级卫生保健的计算机病历中对糖尿病和高血压诊断的验证

获取原文
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Background Computerized Clinical Records, which are incorporated in primary health care practice, have great potential for research. In order to use this information, data quality and reliability must be assessed to prevent compromising the validity of the results. The aim of this study is to validate the diagnosis of hypertension and diabetes mellitus in the computerized clinical records of primary health care, taking the diagnosis criteria established in the most prominently used clinical guidelines as the gold standard against which what measure the sensitivity, specificity, and determine the predictive values. The gold standard for diabetes mellitus was the diagnostic criteria established in 2003 American Diabetes Association Consensus Statement for diabetic subjects. The gold standard for hypertension was the diagnostic criteria established in the Joint National Committee published in 2003. Methods A cross-sectional multicentre validation study of diabetes mellitus and hypertension diagnoses in computerized clinical records of primary health care was carried out. Diagnostic criteria from the most prominently clinical practice guidelines were considered for standard reference. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and global agreement (with kappa index), were calculated. Results were shown overall and stratified by sex and age groups. Results The agreement for diabetes mellitus with the reference standard as determined by the guideline was almost perfect (κ = 0.990), with a sensitivity of 99.53%, a specificity of 99.49%, a positive predictive value of 91.23% and a negative predictive value of 99.98%. Hypertension diagnosis showed substantial agreement with the reference standard as determined by the guideline (κ = 0.778), the sensitivity was 85.22%, the specificity 96.95%, the positive predictive value 85.24%, and the negative predictive value was 96.95%. Sensitivity results were worse in patients who also had diabetes and in those aged 70 years or over. Conclusions Our results substantiate the validity of using diagnoses of diabetes and hypertension found within the computerized clinical records for epidemiologic studies.
机译:背景技术纳入初级卫生保健实践的计算机化临床记录具有巨大的研究潜力。为了使用此信息,必须评估数据质量和可靠性,以防止损害结果的有效性。这项研究的目的是,以最常用的临床指南中确立的诊断标准作为衡量敏感度,特异性,并确定预测值。糖尿病的金标准是2003年《美国糖尿病协会共识声明》为糖尿病患者制定的诊断标准。高血压的金标准是2003年联合全国委员会制定的诊断标准。方法进行了在初级卫生保健的计算机化临床记录中对糖尿病和高血压诊断的横断面多中心验证研究。来自最突出的临床实践指南的诊断标准被视为标准参考。计算了敏感性,特异性,阳性和阴性预测值以及总体一致性(具有kappa指数)。结果总体显示,并按性别和年龄分组。结果根据指南确定的糖尿病与参考标准的一致性几乎是完美的(κ= 0.990),敏感性为99.53%,特异性为99.49%,阳性预测值为91.23%,阴性预测值为99.98%。高血压诊断与指南所确定的参考标准基本吻合(κ= 0.778),敏感性为85.22%,特异性为96.95%,阳性预测值为85.24%,阴性预测值为96.95%。在患有糖尿病的患者以及70岁以上的患者中,敏感性结果较差。结论我们的结果证实了在流行病学研究的计算机化临床记录中使用糖尿病和高血压诊断的有效性。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号