Validity of peptic ulcer disease and upper gastrointestinal bleeding diagnoses in administrative databases: a systematic review protocol.

Autor:	Montedori A; Health Planning Service, Regional Health Authority of Umbria, Perugia, Italy., Abraha I; Health Planning Service, Regional Health Authority of Umbria, Perugia, Italy., Chiatti C; Scientific Directorate, Italian National Research Center on Aging, Ancona, Italy., Cozzolino F; Health Planning Service, Regional Health Authority of Umbria, Perugia, Italy., Orso M; Health Planning Service, Regional Health Authority of Umbria, Perugia, Italy., Luchetta ML; Department of General Medicine, Azienda USL Umbria 1, Perugia, Italy., Rimland JM; Department of Geriatrics and Geriatric Emergency Care, Italian National Research Center on Aging, Ancona, Italy., Ambrosio G; Department of Cardiology, University of Perugia School of Medicine, Perugia, Italy.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	BMJ open [BMJ Open] 2016 Sep 15; Vol. 6 (9), pp. e011776. Date of Electronic Publication: 2016 Sep 15.
DOI:	10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011776
Abstrakt:	Introduction: Administrative healthcare databases are useful to investigate the epidemiology, health outcomes, quality indicators and healthcare utilisation concerning peptic ulcers and gastrointestinal bleeding, but the databases need to be validated in order to be a reliable source for research. The aim of this protocol is to perform the first systematic review of studies reporting the validation of International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision and 10th version (ICD-9 and ICD-10) codes for peptic ulcer and upper gastrointestinal bleeding diagnoses. Methods and Analysis: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library databases will be searched, using appropriate search strategies. We will include validation studies that used administrative data to identify peptic ulcer disease and upper gastrointestinal bleeding diagnoses or studies that evaluated the validity of peptic ulcer and upper gastrointestinal bleeding codes in administrative data. The following inclusion criteria will be used: (a) the presence of a reference standard case definition for the diseases of interest; (b) the presence of at least one test measure (eg, sensitivity, etc) and (c) the use of an administrative database as a source of data. Pairs of reviewers will independently abstract data using standardised forms and will evaluate quality using the checklist of the Standards for Reporting of Diagnostic Accuracy (STARD) criteria. This systematic review protocol has been produced in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocol (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval is not required given that this is a protocol for a systematic review. We will submit results of this study to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. The results will serve as a guide for researchers validating administrative healthcare databases to determine appropriate case definitions for peptic ulcer disease and upper gastrointestinal bleeding, as well as to perform outcome research using administrative healthcare databases of these conditions. Trial Registration Number: CRD42015029216. (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/)
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu