↓ Skip to main content

Validation of coding algorithms for the identification of patients hospitalized for alcoholic hepatitis using administrative data

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Gastroenterology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
26 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 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
Validation of coding algorithms for the identification of patients hospitalized for alcoholic hepatitis using administrative data
Published in
BMC Gastroenterology, September 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12876-015-0348-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jack XQ Pang, Erin Ross, Meredith A. Borman, Scott Zimmer, Gilaad G. Kaplan, Steven J. Heitman, Mark G. Swain, Kelly W. Burak, Hude Quan, Robert P. Myers

Abstract

Epidemiologic studies of alcoholic hepatitis (AH) have been hindered by the lack of a validated International Classification of Disease (ICD) coding algorithm for use with administrative data. Our objective was to validate coding algorithms for AH using a hospitalization database. The Hospital Discharge Abstract Database (DAD) was used to identify consecutive adults (≥18 years) hospitalized in the Calgary region with a diagnosis code for AH (ICD-10, K70.1) between 01/2008 and 08/2012. Medical records were reviewed to confirm the diagnosis of AH, defined as a history of heavy alcohol consumption, elevated AST and/or ALT (<300 U/L), serum bilirubin >34 μmol/L, and elevated INR. Subgroup analyses were performed according to the diagnosis field in which the code was recorded (primary vs. secondary) and AH severity. Algorithms that incorporated ICD-10 codes for cirrhosis and its complications were also examined. Of 228 potential AH cases, 122 patients had confirmed AH, corresponding to a positive predictive value (PPV) of 54 % (95 % CI 47-60 %). PPV improved when AH was the primary versus a secondary diagnosis (67 % vs. 21 %; P < 0.001). Algorithms that included diagnosis codes for ascites (PPV 75 %; 95 % CI 63-86 %), cirrhosis (PPV 60 %; 47-73 %), and gastrointestinal hemorrhage (PPV 62 %; 51-73 %) had improved performance, however, the prevalence of these diagnoses in confirmed AH cases was low (29-39 %). In conclusion the low PPV of the diagnosis code for AH suggests that caution is necessary if this hospitalization database is used in large-scale epidemiologic studies of this condition.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
France 1 2%
Unknown 56 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 22%
Other 5 9%
Student > Master 5 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 7%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Other 11 19%
Unknown 16 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 24 41%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 5%
Mathematics 2 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 3%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 21 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 11 September 2015.
All research outputs
#18,426,826
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from BMC Gastroenterology
#1,125
of 1,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,904
of 267,781 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Gastroenterology
#35
of 50 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,745 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.0. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 267,781 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 50 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.