Validity of acute cardiovascular outcome diagnoses in European electronic health records: a systematic review protocol. Issue 10 (18th October 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Davidson, Jennifer Anne; Banerjee, Amitava; Muzambi, Rutendo; Smeeth, Liam; Warren-Gash, Charlotte
• Is Part Of: BMJ open. Volume 9:Issue 10(2019)
• Publication Date: 2019-10-18
• Subjects: electronic health records -- validation -- systematic review -- cardiovascular diseases; Medicine -- Research -- Periodicals; 610.72
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031373
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2044-6055

Abstract

Abstract : Introduction: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) are among the leading causes of death globally. Electronic health records (EHRs) provide a rich data source for research on CVD risk factors, treatments and outcomes. Researchers must be confident in the validity of diagnoses in EHRs, particularly when diagnosis definitions and use of EHRs change over time. Our systematic review provides an up-to-date appraisal of the validity of stroke, acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and heart failure (HF) diagnoses in European primary and secondary care EHRs. Methods and analysis: We will systematically review the published and grey literature to identify studies validating diagnoses of stroke, ACS and HF in European EHRs. MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, OpenGrey and EThOS will be searched from the dates of inception to April 2019. A prespecified search strategy of subject headings and free-text terms in the title and abstract will be used. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts to identify eligible studies, followed by full-text review. We require studies to compare clinical codes with a suitable reference standard. Additionally, at least one validation measure (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value or negative predictive value) or raw data, for the calculation of a validation measure, is necessary. We will then extract data from the eligible studies using standardised tables and assess risk of bias in individual studies using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 tool. Data will be synthesised into a narrative format and heterogeneity assessed. Meta-analysis will be considered when a sufficient number of homogeneous studies are available. The overall quality of evidence will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. Ethics and dissemination: This is a systematic review, so it does not require ethical approval. Our results will be submitted for peer-review publication. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019123898