Validity of Routinely Reported Rutherford Scores Reported by Clinicians as Part of Daily Clinical Practice.
Rutherford
medical record review
peripheral artery disease
validation
Journal
The International journal of angiology : official publication of the International College of Angiology, Inc
ISSN: 1061-1711
Titre abrégé: Int J Angiol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9504821
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Sep 2024
Sep 2024
Historique:
medline:
25
2
2023
pubmed:
25
2
2023
entrez:
12
8
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Routinely reported structured data from the electronic health record (EHR) are frequently used for secondary purposes. However, it is unknown how valid routinely reported data are for reuse. This study aimed to assess the validity of routinely reported Rutherford scores by clinicians as an indicator for the validity of structured data in the EHR. This observational study compared clinician-reported Rutherford scores with medical record review Rutherford scores for all visits at the vascular surgery department between April 1, 2016 and December 31, 2018. Free-text fields with clinical information for all visits were extracted for the assignment of the medical record review Rutherford score, after which the agreement with the clinician-reported Rutherford score was assessed using Fleiss' Kappa. A total of 6,633 visits were included for medical record review. Substantial agreement was shown between clinician-reported Rutherford scores and medical record review Rutherford scores for the left (
Identifiants
pubmed: 39131806
doi: 10.1055/s-0043-1761280
pii: IJA-2022-0004
pmc: PMC11315596
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
148-155Informations de copyright
International College of Angiology. This article is published by Thieme.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflict of Interest None declared.