| Title |
Development of an algorithm to identify urgent referrals for suspected cancer from the Danish Primary Care Referral Database
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/clep.s114721 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Berit Skjødeberg Toftegaard, Louise Mahncke Guldbrandt, Kaare Rud Flarup, Hanne Beyer, Flemming Bro, Peter Vedsted |
| Abstract |
Accurate identification of specific patient populations is a crucial tool in health care. A prerequisite for exploring the actions taken by general practitioners (GPs) on symptoms of cancer is being able to identify patients urgently referred for suspected cancer. Such system is not available in Denmark; however, all referrals are electronically stored. This study aimed to develop and test an algorithm based on referral text to identify urgent cancer referrals from general practice. Two urgently referred reference populations were extracted from a research database and linked with the Primary Care Referral (PCR) database through the unique Danish civil registration number to identify the corresponding electronic referrals. The PCR database included GP referrals directed to private specialists and hospital departments, and these referrals were scrutinized. The most frequently used words were integrated in the first version of the algorithm, which was further refined by an iterative process involving two population samples from the PCR database. The performance was finally evaluated for two other PCR population samples against manual assessment as the gold standard for urgent cancer referral. The final algorithm had a sensitivity of 0.939 (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.905-0.963) and a specificity of 0.937 (95% CI: 0.925-0.963) compared to the gold standard. The positive and negative predictive values were 69.8% (95% CI: 65.0-74.3) and 99.0% (95% CI: 98.4-99.4), respectively. When applying the algorithm on referrals for a population without earlier cancer diagnoses, the positive predictive value increased to 83.6% (95% CI: 78.7-87.7) and the specificity to 97.3% (95% CI: 96.4-98.0). The final algorithm identified 94% of the patients urgently referred for suspected cancer; less than 3% of the patients were incorrectly identified. It is now possible to identify patients urgently referred on cancer suspicion from general practice by applying an algorithm for populations in the PCR database. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 36% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 7% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 3 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 36% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 7% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 7% |
| Psychology | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 1 | 7% |
| Unknown | 4 | 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 27 October 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#639
of 793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#257,464
of 332,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#22
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 793 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 332,577 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 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.