Literature DB >> 7630991

Evaluating false positives in two hospital discharge data sets of the Birth Defects Monitoring Program.

F A Callif-Daley1, C A Huether, L D Edmonds.   

Abstract

The principal goal in this study was to quantify false positives in the hospital discharge data of the Birth Defects Monitoring Program conducted by the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention. The two hospital data processing agencies which contribute data to the Birth Defects Monitoring Program, the Commission on Professional and Hospital Activities and the McDonnell Douglas Health Information Systems, had respective levels of false positives of 13.2 percent and 8.5 percent, levels which were statistically different from each other. These false positive levels should be considered minimal because these data bases do not include information on sick babies who may be transferred into or out of member hospitals, and who may have their initial diagnoses significantly modified. Potential correlates of false positives were evaluated, including hospital size, diagnostic certainty, race, sex, and insurance source. Two-thirds of all false positives were due to the miscoding of correctly diagnosed anomalies, and another quarter were clearly contradicted in notes easily available before the patients were discharged. The authors hope that this study of false positives will enhance the interpretation of the Birth Defects Monitoring Program data and lead to improved understanding of data collection and processing.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7630991      PMCID: PMC1382094     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Public Health Rep        ISSN: 0033-3549            Impact factor:   2.792


  6 in total

1.  Evaluation of the hospital discharge diagnoses index and the birth certificate as sources of information on birth defects.

Authors:  A C Hexter; J A Harris; P Roeper; L A Croen; P Krueger; D Gant
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  1990 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.792

2.  ICD, POR, and DRG. Unsolved scientific problems in the nosology of clinical medicine.

Authors:  A R Feinstein
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1988-10

3.  Accuracy of diagnostic coding for Medicare patients under the prospective-payment system.

Authors:  D C Hsia; W M Krushat; A B Fagan; J A Tebbutt; R P Kusserow
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1988-02-11       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  Congenital malformations surveillance: two American systems.

Authors:  L D Edmonds; P M Layde; L M James; J W Flynt; J D Erickson; G P Oakley
Journal:  Int J Epidemiol       Date:  1981-09       Impact factor: 7.196

Review 5.  Birth defects monitoring.

Authors:  M A Klingberg; C M Papier; J Hart
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  1983       Impact factor: 2.214

6.  The quality of notification of congenital malformations.

Authors:  E G Knox; E H Armstrong; R Lancashire
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 3.710

  6 in total
  4 in total

1.  Identifying Algorithms to Improve the Accuracy of Unverified Diagnosis Codes for Birth Defects.

Authors:  Jason L Salemi; Rachel E Rutkowski; Jean Paul Tanner; Jennifer L Matas; Russell S Kirby
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 2.792

2.  A quality assessment of reporting sources for microcephaly in Utah, 2003 to 2013.

Authors:  Amy Steele; Jane Johnson; Amy Nance; Robert Satterfield; C J Alverson; Cara Mai
Journal:  Birth Defects Res A Clin Mol Teratol       Date:  2016-11

3.  Prevalence of neural tube defects in the province of Quebec, 1992.

Authors:  P De Wals; C Trochet; L Pinsonneault
Journal:  Can J Public Health       Date:  1999 Jul-Aug

4.  The Impact of Different Case Ascertainment Definitions on the Prevalence of Major Congenital Malformations and their Association with Asthma During Pregnancy.

Authors:  Sherif Eltonsy; Amelie Forget; Lucie Blais
Journal:  Matern Child Health J       Date:  2017-03
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.