| Title |
Diagnostic accuracy of ICD-9 code 780.2 for the identification of patients with syncope in the emergency department
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Autonomic Research, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10286-018-0509-z |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Ludovico Furlan, Monica Solbiati, Veronica Pacetti, Franca Dipaola, Martino Meda, Mattia Bonzi, Elisa Fiorelli, Giulia Cernuschi, Daniele Alberio, Giovanni Casazza, Nicola Montano, Raffaello Furlan, Giorgio Costantino |
| Abstract |
Syncope is a common condition that affects individuals of all ages and is responsible for 1-3% of all emergency department (ED) visits. Prospective studies on syncope are often limited by the exiguous number of subjects enrolled. A possible alternative approach would be to use of hospital discharge diagnoses from administrative databases to identify syncope subjects in epidemiological observational studies. We assessed the accuracy of the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) code 780.2 "syncope and collapse" to identify patients with syncope. Patients in two teaching hospitals in Milan, Italy with a triage assessment for ED access that was possibly related to syncope were recruited in this study. We considered the index test to be the attribution of the ICD-9 code 780.2 at ED discharge and the reference standard to be the diagnosis of syncope by the ED physician. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of the ICD-9 code 780.2 to identify patients with syncope were 0.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.67), 0.98 (95% CI 0.98-0.99), 0.83 (95% CI 0.79-0.87) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.94-0.95), respectively. The moderate sensitivity of ICD-9 code 780.2 should be considered when the code is used to identify patients with syncope through administrative databases. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 21% |
| Unknown | 4 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 50% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 4% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 29% |
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 13 February 2018.
All research outputs
#18,587,406
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Autonomic Research
#647
of 786 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#334,195
of 445,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Autonomic Research
#22
of 31 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 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 786 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.9. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% 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 445,207 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 31 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.