Literature DB >> 27166201

Quantifying Selection Bias in National Institute of Health Stroke Scale Data Documented in an Acute Stroke Registry.

Michael P Thompson1, Zhehui Luo2, Joseph Gardiner2, James F Burke2, Adrienne Nickles2, Mathew J Reeves2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: As a measure of stroke severity, the National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS) is an important predictor of patient- and hospital-level outcomes, yet is often undocumented. The purpose of this study is to quantify and correct for potential selection bias in observed NIHSS data. METHODS AND
RESULTS: Data were obtained from the Michigan Stroke Registry and included 10 262 patients with ischemic stroke aged ≥65 years discharged from 23 hospitals from 2009 to 2012, of which 74.6% of patients had documented NIHSS. We estimated models predicting NIHSS documentation and NIHSS score and used the Heckman selection model to estimate a correlation coefficient (ρ) between the 2 model error terms, which quantifies the degree of selection bias in the documentation of NIHSS. The Heckman model found modest, but significant, selection bias (ρ=0.19; 95% confidence interval: 0.09, 0.29; P<0.001), indicating that because NIHSS score increased (ie, strokes were more severe), the probability of documentation also increased. We also estimated a selection bias-corrected population mean NIHSS score of 4.8, which was substantially lower than the observed mean NIHSS score of 7.4. Evidence of selection bias was also identified using hospital-level analysis, where increased NIHSS documentation was correlated with lower mean NIHSS scores (r=-0.39; P<0.001).
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate modest, but important, selection bias in documented NIHSS data, which are missing more often in patients with less severe stroke. The population mean NIHSS score was overestimated by >2 points, which could significantly alter the risk profile of hospitals treating patients with ischemic stroke and subsequent hospital risk-adjusted outcomes.
© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  documentation; hospitals; registries; risk adjustment; selection bias; stroke

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27166201     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.115.002352

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes        ISSN: 1941-7713


  4 in total

1.  Comparison of Acute Ischemic Stroke Care and Outcomes Between Comprehensive Stroke Centers and Primary Stroke Centers in the United States.

Authors:  Shumei Man; Xin Zhao; Ken Uchino; M Shazam Hussain; Eric E Smith; Deepak L Bhatt; Ying Xian; Lee H Schwamm; Shreyansh Shah; Yosef Khan; Gregg C Fonarow
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2018-06

2.  Evaluation of efficacy and safety of Reteplase and Alteplase in the treatment of hyper-acute cerebral infarction.

Authors:  Zhi-Jian Lin; Hong-Yan Qiu; Xiao-Xin Tong; Yi Guo; Man-Fu Han; Chun-Shui Yang; Kai-Hua Lin; Jun Wu; Xing Li; Yang Yang
Journal:  Biosci Rep       Date:  2018-01-17       Impact factor: 3.840

3.  The impact of disease severity adjustment on hospital standardised mortality ratios: Results from a service-wide analysis of ischaemic stroke admissions using linked pre-hospital, admissions and mortality data.

Authors:  Melina Gattellari; Chris Goumas; Bin Jalaludin; John Worthington
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-05-21       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  The Value of Combined Detection of D-dimer and CD62p in Judging the Severity of Acute Cerebral Infarction and Short-Term Prognosis.

Authors:  Min Xu; Xiao-Ying He; Pan Huang
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2021-01-14       Impact factor: 3.411

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.