↓ Skip to main content

Validity of gout diagnosis in Swedish primary and secondary care - a validation study

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (78th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
34 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Validity of gout diagnosis in Swedish primary and secondary care - a validation study
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12891-015-0614-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mats Dehlin, Kalliopi Stasinopoulou, Lennart Jacobsson

Abstract

The diagnostic golden standard for gout is to detect monosodium urate (MSU) crystals in synovial fluid. While some gout classification criteria include this variable, most gout diagnoses are based on clinical features. This discrepancy between clinical practice and classification criteria can hinder gout epidemiological studies. Here, the objective was to validate gout diagnoses (International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 gout codes) in primary and secondary care relative to five classification criteria (Rome, New York, ARA, Mexico, and Netherlands). The frequency with which MSU crystal identification was used to establish gout diagnosis was also determined. In total, 394 patients with ≥1 ICD-10 gout diagnosis between 2009 and 2013 were identified from the medical records of two primary care centers (n = 262) and one secondary care center (n = 132) in Gothenburg, Sweden. Medical records were assessed for all classification criteria. Primary care patients met criteria cutoffs more frequently when ≥2 gout diagnoses were made. Even then, few primary care patients met the Rome and New York cutoffs (19 % and 8 %, respectively). The ARA, Mexico, and Netherlands cutoffs were met more frequently by primary care patients with ≥2 gout diagnoses (54 %, 81 %, and 80 %, respectively). Mexico and Netherlands cutoffs were met more frequently by the rheumatology department patients (80 % and 71 %, respectively), even when patients with only 1 gout diagnosis were included. Analysis of MSU crystals served to establish gout diagnoses in only 27 % of rheumatology department and 2 % of primary care cases. If a patient was deemed to have gout at ≥2 primary care center or ≥1 rheumatology-center visits according to an ICD-10 gout code, the positive predictive value of this variable in relation with the Mexico and Netherlands classification criteria was ≥80 % for both primary care and rheumatology care settings in Sweden. MSU crystal identification was rarely used to establish gout diagnosis.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 34 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Australia 1 3%
Unknown 32 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Researcher 4 12%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 6 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 15 44%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 9 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 June 2017.
All research outputs
#4,215,045
of 22,981,247 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#840
of 4,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#48,269
of 240,237 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#10
of 47 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,981,247 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,088 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 240,237 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 47 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.