| Title |
Validity of a hospital-based obstetric register using medical records as reference
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Clinical Epidemiology, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/clep.s93675 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carina Sjöberg Brixval, Lau Caspar Thygesen, Nanna Roed Johansen, Christina Rørbye, Tom Weber, Pernille Due, Vibeke Koushede |
| Abstract |
Data from hospital-based registers and medical records offer valuable sources of information for clinical and epidemiological research purposes. However, conducting high-quality epidemiological research requires valid and complete data sources. To assess completeness and validity of a hospital-based clinical register - the Obstetric Database - using a national register and medical records as references. We assessed completeness of a hospital-based clinical register - the Obstetric Database - by linking data from all women registered in the Obstetric Database as having given birth in 2013 to the National Patient Register with coverage of all births in 2013. Validity of eleven selected indicators from the Obstetric Database was assessed using medical records as a golden standard. Using a random sample of 250 medical records, we calculated proportion of agreement, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values for each indicator. Two assessors independently reviewed medical records and inter-rater reliability was calculated as proportion of agreement and Cohen's κ coefficient. We found 100% completeness of the Obstetric Database when compared to the Danish National Patient Register. Except for one delivery all 6,717 deliveries were present in both registers. Proportion of agreement between the Obstetric Database and medical records ranged from 91.1% to 99.6% for the eleven indicators. The validity measures ranged from 0.70 to 1.00 indicating high validity of the Obstetric Database. κ coefficients from the inter-rater reliability ranged from 0.71 to 1.00. Completeness and validity of the Obstetric Database were found acceptable when using the National Patient Register and medical records as golden standards. The Obstetric Database therefore offers a valuable source for examining clinical, administrative, and research questions. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 6 | 23% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 19% |
| Librarian | 2 | 8% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Researcher | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Unknown | 6 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 42% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 8 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 11 December 2015.
All research outputs
#16,722,190
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Epidemiology
#508
of 793 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,051
of 294,815 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Epidemiology
#4
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% 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 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% 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 294,815 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.