SynthesisDrug safety2019
Diagnostic Algorithms for Cardiovascular Death in Administrative Claims Databases: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in Drug safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing Cardiovascular Outcomes in New Users of Oral Semaglutide Versus Other Noninsulin Glucose-Lowering Therapies Among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2026Article
- Comparison of cardiovascular outcomes between once-weekly semaglutide and dulaglutide in adults with type 2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the United States.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
- Semaglutide and tirzepatide effects on cardiovascular outcomes in people with overweight or obesity in the real world (STEER).Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026 · on this mapObservational
- Lower risk of cardiovascular events in patients initiated on semaglutide 2.4 mg in the real-world: Results from the SCORE study (Semaglutide Effects on Cardiovascular Outcomes in People with Overweight or Obesity in the Real World).Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025 · on this mapObservational
- Comparative Effectiveness of Second-Line Antihyperglycemic Agents for Cardiovascular Outcomes: A Multinational, Federated Analysis of LEGEND-T2DM.Journal of the American College of Cardiology · 2024Article
- Comparative safety of tramadol and other opioids following total hip and knee arthroplasty.BMC geriatrics · 2024Article
- Electrocardiographic deep learning for predicting post-procedural mortality: a model development and validation study.The Lancet. Digital health · 2024Article
- Article
- Association of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist vs Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor Use With Mortality Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- Validation of Algorithms to Identify Acute Myocardial Infarction, Stroke, and Cardiovascular Death in German Health Insurance Data.Clinical epidemiology · 2022Article
- Data Consult Service: Can we use observational data to address immediate clinical needs?Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Machine-learning model to predict the cause of death using a stacking ensemble method for observational data.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Idiosyncratic Drug-Induced Liver Injury (DILI) and Herb-Induced Liver Injury (HILI): Diagnostic Algorithm Based on the Quantitative Roussel Uclaf Causality Assessment Method (RUCAM).Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Bias Implications of Outcome Misclassification in Observational Studies Evaluating Association Between Treatments and All-Cause or Cardiovascular Mortality Using Administrative Claims.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2020Observational
- A comparison of two algorithms to identify sudden cardiac deaths in computerized databases.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
20 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionValid algorithms for identification of cardiovascular (CV) deaths allow researchers to reliably assess the CV safety of medications, which is of importance to regulatory science, patient safety, and public health.
objectiveThe aim was to conduct a systematic review of algorithms to identify CV death in administrative health plan claims databases.
methodsWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library for English-language studies published between January 1, 2012 and October 17, 2017. We examined references in systematic reviews to identify earlier studies. Selection included any observational study using electronic health care data to evaluate the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), or negative predictive value (NPV) of algorithms for CV death (sudden cardiac death [SCD], myocardial infarction [MI]-related death, or stroke-related death) among adults aged ≥ 18 years in the United States. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers, with disagreements resolved through further discussion and consensus. The Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 instrument was used to assess the risk of bias.
resultsFive studies (n = 4 on SCD, n = 1 on MI- and stroke-related death) were included after a review of 2053 citations. All studies reported algorithm PPVs, with incomplete reporting on other accuracy parameters. One study was at low risk of bias, three studies were at moderate risk of bias, and one study was at unclear risk of bias. Two studies identified community-occurring SCD: one identified events using International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision (ICD-9) codes on death certificates and other criteria from medical claims (PPV = 86.8%) and the other identified events resulting in hospital presentation using first-listed ICD-9 codes on emergency department or inpatient medical claims (PPV = 92.3%). Two studies used death certificates alone to identify SCD (PPV = 27% and 32%, respectively). One study used medical claims to identify CV death (PPV = 36.4%), coronary heart disease mortality (PPV = 28.3%), and stroke mortality (PPV = 34.5%).
conclusionTwo existing algorithms based on medical claims diagnoses with or without death certificates can accurately identify SCD to support pharmacoepidemiologic studies. Developing valid algorithms identifying MI- and stroke-related death should be a research priority. PROSPERO 2017 CRD42017078745.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.