MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1136/openhrt-2022-002151

Медицинская библиотека · Open heart · 2023

Systematic review of validated case definitions to identify hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in administrative healthcare databases.

Johnston Amy, Dancey Sonia R, Tseung Victrine, Skidmore Becky, Tanuseputro Peter, Smith Graeme N, Coutinho Thais, Edwards Jodi D

Систематический обзорСтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Administrative data are frequently used to study cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk in women with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP). Little is known about the validity of case-finding definitions (CFDs, eg, disease classification codes/algorithms) designed to identify HDP in administrative databases.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and grey literature sources for eligible studies. Two independent reviewers screened articles for eligibility and extracted data. Quality of reporting was assessed using checklists; risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool, adapted for administrative studies. Findings were summarised descriptively.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included; most (62%) validated CFDs for a variety of maternal and/or neonatal outcomes. Six studies (24%) reported reference standard definitions for all HDP definitions validated; seven reported all 2×2 table values for ≥1 CFD or they were calculable. Most CFDs (n=83; 58%) identified HDP with high specificity (ie, ≥98%); however, sensitivity varied widely (3%-100%). CFDs validated for any maternal hypertensive disorder had the highest median sensitivity (91%, range: 15%-97%). Quality of reporting was generally poor, and all studies were at unclear or high risk of bias on ≥1 QUADAS-2 domain.

CONCLUSIONS

Even validated CFDs are subject to bias. Researchers should choose the CFD(s) that best align with their research objective, while considering the relative importance of high sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and/or positive predictive value, and important characteristics of the validation studies from which they were derived (eg, study prevalence of HDP, spectrum of disease studied, methodological rigour, quality of reporting and risk of bias). Higher quality validation studies on this topic are urgently needed.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021239113.

Для цитирования: Johnston Amy, Dancey Sonia R, Tseung Victrine, Skidmore Becky, Tanuseputro Peter, Smith Graeme N, Coutinho Thais, Edwards Jodi D. Systematic review of validated case definitions to identify hypertensive disorders of pregnancy in administrative healthcare databases.. Open heart. 2023. DOI: 10.1136/openhrt-2022-002151.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.