Cargando…

Validity of acute cardiovascular outcome diagnoses in European electronic health records: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are among the leading causes of death globally. Electronic health records (EHRs) provide a rich data source for research on CVD risk factors, treatments and outcomes. Researchers must be confident in the validity of diagnoses in EHRs, particularly when di...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Davidson, Jennifer Anne, Banerjee, Amitava, Muzambi, Rutendo, Smeeth, Liam, Warren-Gash, Charlotte
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6803089/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31630109
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031373
_version_ 1783460898532229120
author Davidson, Jennifer Anne
Banerjee, Amitava
Muzambi, Rutendo
Smeeth, Liam
Warren-Gash, Charlotte
author_facet Davidson, Jennifer Anne
Banerjee, Amitava
Muzambi, Rutendo
Smeeth, Liam
Warren-Gash, Charlotte
author_sort Davidson, Jennifer Anne
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are among the leading causes of death globally. Electronic health records (EHRs) provide a rich data source for research on CVD risk factors, treatments and outcomes. Researchers must be confident in the validity of diagnoses in EHRs, particularly when diagnosis definitions and use of EHRs change over time. Our systematic review provides an up-to-date appraisal of the validity of stroke, acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and heart failure (HF) diagnoses in European primary and secondary care EHRs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will systematically review the published and grey literature to identify studies validating diagnoses of stroke, ACS and HF in European EHRs. MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, OpenGrey and EThOS will be searched from the dates of inception to April 2019. A prespecified search strategy of subject headings and free-text terms in the title and abstract will be used. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts to identify eligible studies, followed by full-text review. We require studies to compare clinical codes with a suitable reference standard. Additionally, at least one validation measure (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value or negative predictive value) or raw data, for the calculation of a validation measure, is necessary. We will then extract data from the eligible studies using standardised tables and assess risk of bias in individual studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. Data will be synthesised into a narrative format and heterogeneity assessed. Meta-analysis will be considered when a sufficient number of homogeneous studies are available. The overall quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This is a systematic review, so it does not require ethical approval. Our results will be submitted for peer-review publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019123898
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6803089
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68030892019-10-31 Validity of acute cardiovascular outcome diagnoses in European electronic health records: a systematic review protocol Davidson, Jennifer Anne Banerjee, Amitava Muzambi, Rutendo Smeeth, Liam Warren-Gash, Charlotte BMJ Open Research Methods INTRODUCTION: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are among the leading causes of death globally. Electronic health records (EHRs) provide a rich data source for research on CVD risk factors, treatments and outcomes. Researchers must be confident in the validity of diagnoses in EHRs, particularly when diagnosis definitions and use of EHRs change over time. Our systematic review provides an up-to-date appraisal of the validity of stroke, acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and heart failure (HF) diagnoses in European primary and secondary care EHRs. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will systematically review the published and grey literature to identify studies validating diagnoses of stroke, ACS and HF in European EHRs. MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, OpenGrey and EThOS will be searched from the dates of inception to April 2019. A prespecified search strategy of subject headings and free-text terms in the title and abstract will be used. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts to identify eligible studies, followed by full-text review. We require studies to compare clinical codes with a suitable reference standard. Additionally, at least one validation measure (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value or negative predictive value) or raw data, for the calculation of a validation measure, is necessary. We will then extract data from the eligible studies using standardised tables and assess risk of bias in individual studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. Data will be synthesised into a narrative format and heterogeneity assessed. Meta-analysis will be considered when a sufficient number of homogeneous studies are available. The overall quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This is a systematic review, so it does not require ethical approval. Our results will be submitted for peer-review publication. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019123898 BMJ Publishing Group 2019-10-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6803089/ /pubmed/31630109 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031373 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Research Methods
Davidson, Jennifer Anne
Banerjee, Amitava
Muzambi, Rutendo
Smeeth, Liam
Warren-Gash, Charlotte
Validity of acute cardiovascular outcome diagnoses in European electronic health records: a systematic review protocol
title Validity of acute cardiovascular outcome diagnoses in European electronic health records: a systematic review protocol
title_full Validity of acute cardiovascular outcome diagnoses in European electronic health records: a systematic review protocol
title_fullStr Validity of acute cardiovascular outcome diagnoses in European electronic health records: a systematic review protocol
title_full_unstemmed Validity of acute cardiovascular outcome diagnoses in European electronic health records: a systematic review protocol
title_short Validity of acute cardiovascular outcome diagnoses in European electronic health records: a systematic review protocol
title_sort validity of acute cardiovascular outcome diagnoses in european electronic health records: a systematic review protocol
topic Research Methods
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6803089/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31630109
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031373
work_keys_str_mv AT davidsonjenniferanne validityofacutecardiovascularoutcomediagnosesineuropeanelectronichealthrecordsasystematicreviewprotocol
AT banerjeeamitava validityofacutecardiovascularoutcomediagnosesineuropeanelectronichealthrecordsasystematicreviewprotocol
AT muzambirutendo validityofacutecardiovascularoutcomediagnosesineuropeanelectronichealthrecordsasystematicreviewprotocol
AT smeethliam validityofacutecardiovascularoutcomediagnosesineuropeanelectronichealthrecordsasystematicreviewprotocol
AT warrengashcharlotte validityofacutecardiovascularoutcomediagnosesineuropeanelectronichealthrecordsasystematicreviewprotocol