↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Underrecording of osteoarthritis in United Kingdom primary care electronic health record data

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Epidemiology, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (54th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
20 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
Title
Underrecording of osteoarthritis in United Kingdom primary care electronic health record data
Published in
Clinical Epidemiology, September 2018
DOI 10.2147/clep.s160059
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dahai Yu, Kelvin P Jordan, George Peat

Abstract

Primary care electronic health records are increasingly used to estimate the occurrence of osteoarthritis (OA). We aimed to estimate the extent and trend over time of underrecording of severe OA patients in UK primary care electronic health records using first primary total hip and knee replacements (THR/TKR) - >90% of which are performed for OA - as the reference population. We identified patients with a first primary THR or TKR recorded in the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink between 2000 and 2015. We then searched for a diagnostic/problem code for OA up to 10 years prior to THR/TKR using 3 definitions: "diagnosed OA (joint-specific)," "diagnosed OA (any joint)," "clinical OA" (diagnosed OA or relevant peripheral joint pain symptom code). Among 34,299 THR patients identified, 28.1%, 53.4%, and 74.4% had a prior record of diagnosed OA (hip), diagnosed OA (any), and clinical OA, respectively. Among 47,588 TKR patients, the corresponding figures were, 25.5% (diagnosed OA [knee]), 43.7%, and 74.8%. In the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, the proportion of patients with prior recorded OA decreased between 2000 and 2015. An increasing trend of underrecording of OA or joint pain among patients with THR or TKR (severe OA patients) between 2000 and 2015 was identified. An underestimate health care demand could be derived based on consultation incidence and prevalence of OA from electronic health record data that relies on osteoarthritis diagnostic codes. Further studies are warranted to investigate the validity of OA or joint pain recorded in primary care settings, which might be used to correct the consultation incidence and prevalence of OA.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 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 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 33 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 21%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 11 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 24%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 6%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 5 15%
Unknown 13 39%
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 13 February 2021.
All research outputs
#7,576,061
of 23,103,436 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#301
of 727 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,186
of 335,776 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#12
of 39 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,103,436 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 727 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% 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 335,776 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 54% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 39 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 66% of its contemporaries.