↓ Skip to main content

ICD-9 Code-Based Venous Thromboembolism Performance Targets Fail to Measure Up

Overview of attention for article published in American Journal of Medical Quality, April 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
policy
1 policy source
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 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
ICD-9 Code-Based Venous Thromboembolism Performance Targets Fail to Measure Up
Published in
American Journal of Medical Quality, April 2015
DOI 10.1177/1062860615583547
Pubmed ID
Authors

Brandyn D. Lau, Elliott R. Haut, Deborah B. Hobson, Peggy S. Kraus, Chepkorir Maritim, J. Matthew Austin, Kenneth M. Shermock, Bhunesh Maheshwari, Paul X. Allen, Aileen Almario, Michael B. Streiff

Abstract

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication among hospitalized patients. Suboptimal prevention practices have prompted payers to consider hospital-associated VTE as a potentially preventable condition for which financial incentives or penalties exist to drive practice improvement. The authors reviewed all cases of hospital-associated VTE at the Johns Hopkins Hospital between July 1, 2010, and June 30, 2011, that were identified by ICD-9 codes used by a state-run pay-for-performance quality improvement program. Of 157 patients identified as having developed hospital-associated, potentially preventable VTE, only 92 (58.6%) patients developed radiographically confirmed VTE that were potentially preventable. This misclassification of VTE overestimates the marginal additional treatment cost by more than $860 000 and amounts to nearly $200 000 in lost reward in one year alone. ICD-9 codes alone have extremely low positive predictive value to identify true VTE events. The authors recommend linking provision of risk-appropriate prophylaxis to VTE outcomes as a better target for performance improvement.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users 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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 6 19%
Student > Master 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 9%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 7 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 28%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 12 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. 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 02 March 2018.
All research outputs
#2,383,210
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from American Journal of Medical Quality
#76
of 844 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,799
of 265,229 outputs
Outputs of similar age from American Journal of Medical Quality
#1
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 844 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 265,229 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 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them