↓ Skip to main content

Validation of a coding algorithm for intra‐abdominal surgeries and adhesion‐related complications in an electronic medical records database

Overview of attention for article published in Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (64th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Readers on

mendeley
40 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.
Article details
Title
Validation of a coding algorithm for intra‐abdominal surgeries and adhesion‐related complications in an electronic medical records database
Published in
Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety, February 2016
DOI 10.1002/pds.3974
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Epidemiological data on adhesion-related complications following intra-abdominal surgery are limited. We tested the accuracy of recording of these surgeries and complications within The Health Improvement Network (THIN), a primary care database within the UK. Individuals within THIN from 1995 to 2011 with an incident intra-abdominal surgery and subsequent bowel obstruction (SBO) or adhesiolysis were identified using diagnostic codes. To compute positive predictive values (PPVs), requests were sent to treating physicians of patients with these diagnostic codes to confirm the surgery, SBO, or adhesiolysis code. Completeness of recording was estimated by comparing observed surgical rates within THIN to expected rates derived from the Hospital Episode Statistics dataset within England. Cumulative incidence rates of adhesion-related complications at 5 years were compared with a previously published cohort within Scotland. Two hundred seventeen of 245 (89%) questionnaires were returned (180 SBO and 37 adhesiolysis). The PPV of codes for surgery was 94.5% (95%CI: 91-97%). The 88.8% of procedure types were correctly coded. The PPV for SBO and adhesiolysis was 86.1% (95%CI: 80-91%) and 89.2% (95%CI: 75-97%), respectively. Colectomy, appendectomy, and cholecystectomy rates within THIN were 99%, 95%, and 84% of rates observed in national Hospital Episode Statistics data, respectively. Cumulative incidence rates of adhesion related complications following colectomy, appendectomy, and small bowel surgery were similar to those published previously. Surgical procedures, SBO, and adhesiolysis can be accurately identified within THIN using diagnostic codes. THIN represents a new tool for assessing patient-specific risk factors for adhesion-related complications and long-term outcomes. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 40 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 39 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 28%
Student > Master 7 18%
Student > Bachelor 4 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 8%
Lecturer 2 5%
Other 6 15%
Unknown 7 18%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 21 53%
Social Sciences 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Psychology 2 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 8 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 February 2016.
All research outputs
#21,659,248
of 34,410,798 outputs
Outputs from Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety
#1,520
of 2,611 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#263,899
of 456,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety
#18
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,798 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,611 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 456,246 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its contemporaries.