基于临床和放射学人群队列的行政性骨关节炎诊断的验证

IF 2.3 Q2 RHEUMATOLOGY International Journal of Rheumatology Pub Date : 2016-12-29 DOI:10.1155/2016/6475318
M. M. Rahman, Jacek A. Kopec, C. Goldsmith, A. Anis, J. Cibere
{"title":"基于临床和放射学人群队列的行政性骨关节炎诊断的验证","authors":"M. M. Rahman, Jacek A. Kopec, C. Goldsmith, A. Anis, J. Cibere","doi":"10.1155/2016/6475318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objectives. The validity of administrative osteoarthritis (OA) diagnosis in British Columbia, Canada, was examined against X-rays, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), self-report, and the American College of Rheumatology criteria. Methods. During 2002–2005, 171 randomly selected subjects with knee pain aged 40–79 years underwent clinical assessment for OA in the knee, hip, and hands. Their administrative health records were linked during 1991–2004, in which OA was defined in two ways: (AOA1) at least one physician's diagnosis or hospital admission and (AOA2) at least two physician's diagnoses in two years or one hospital admission. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were compared using four reference standards. Results. The mean age was 59 years and 51% were men. The proportion of OA varied from 56.3 to 89.7% among men and 77.4 to 96.4% among women according to reference standards. Sensitivity and specificity varied from 21 to 57% and 75 to 100%, respectively, and PPVs varied from 82 to 100%. For MRI assessment, the PPV of AOA2 was 100%. Higher sensitivity was observed in AOA1 than AOA2 and the reverse was true for specificity and PPV. Conclusions. The validity of administrative OA in British Columbia varied due to case definitions and reference standards. AOA2 is more suitable for identifying OA cases for research using this Canadian database.","PeriodicalId":51715,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Rheumatology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/6475318","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validation of Administrative Osteoarthritis Diagnosis Using a Clinical and Radiological Population-Based Cohort\",\"authors\":\"M. M. Rahman, Jacek A. Kopec, C. Goldsmith, A. Anis, J. Cibere\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2016/6475318\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Objectives. The validity of administrative osteoarthritis (OA) diagnosis in British Columbia, Canada, was examined against X-rays, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), self-report, and the American College of Rheumatology criteria. Methods. During 2002–2005, 171 randomly selected subjects with knee pain aged 40–79 years underwent clinical assessment for OA in the knee, hip, and hands. Their administrative health records were linked during 1991–2004, in which OA was defined in two ways: (AOA1) at least one physician's diagnosis or hospital admission and (AOA2) at least two physician's diagnoses in two years or one hospital admission. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were compared using four reference standards. Results. The mean age was 59 years and 51% were men. The proportion of OA varied from 56.3 to 89.7% among men and 77.4 to 96.4% among women according to reference standards. Sensitivity and specificity varied from 21 to 57% and 75 to 100%, respectively, and PPVs varied from 82 to 100%. For MRI assessment, the PPV of AOA2 was 100%. Higher sensitivity was observed in AOA1 than AOA2 and the reverse was true for specificity and PPV. Conclusions. The validity of administrative OA in British Columbia varied due to case definitions and reference standards. AOA2 is more suitable for identifying OA cases for research using this Canadian database.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51715,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Rheumatology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-12-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/6475318\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Rheumatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6475318\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"RHEUMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Rheumatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/6475318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RHEUMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

摘要

目标。在加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省,对行政性骨关节炎(OA)诊断的有效性进行了x射线、磁共振成像(MRI)、自我报告和美国风湿病学会标准的检查。方法。在2002-2005年期间,171名随机选择的40-79岁的膝关节疼痛患者接受了膝关节、髋关节和手部OA的临床评估。他们的行政健康记录在1991-2004年期间被联系起来,其中OA以两种方式定义:(AOA1)至少有一名医生诊断或住院,(AOA2)至少有两名医生诊断或一次住院。使用四种参考标准比较敏感性、特异性和预测值。结果。平均年龄为59岁,51%为男性。根据参考标准,男性OA比例为56.3 ~ 89.7%,女性为77.4 ~ 96.4%。敏感性和特异性分别为21% ~ 57%和75% ~ 100%,ppv为82% ~ 100%。MRI评估AOA2的PPV为100%。AOA1的敏感性高于AOA2,而特异性和PPV则相反。结论。不列颠哥伦比亚省行政OA的有效性因案例定义和参考标准而异。AOA2更适合于使用这个加拿大数据库识别OA案例进行研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Validation of Administrative Osteoarthritis Diagnosis Using a Clinical and Radiological Population-Based Cohort
Objectives. The validity of administrative osteoarthritis (OA) diagnosis in British Columbia, Canada, was examined against X-rays, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), self-report, and the American College of Rheumatology criteria. Methods. During 2002–2005, 171 randomly selected subjects with knee pain aged 40–79 years underwent clinical assessment for OA in the knee, hip, and hands. Their administrative health records were linked during 1991–2004, in which OA was defined in two ways: (AOA1) at least one physician's diagnosis or hospital admission and (AOA2) at least two physician's diagnoses in two years or one hospital admission. Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were compared using four reference standards. Results. The mean age was 59 years and 51% were men. The proportion of OA varied from 56.3 to 89.7% among men and 77.4 to 96.4% among women according to reference standards. Sensitivity and specificity varied from 21 to 57% and 75 to 100%, respectively, and PPVs varied from 82 to 100%. For MRI assessment, the PPV of AOA2 was 100%. Higher sensitivity was observed in AOA1 than AOA2 and the reverse was true for specificity and PPV. Conclusions. The validity of administrative OA in British Columbia varied due to case definitions and reference standards. AOA2 is more suitable for identifying OA cases for research using this Canadian database.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
An Observational Study on the Clinical Characteristics and Prognosis of Patients With Interstitial Lung Disease Secondary to Dermatomyositis and Antisynthetase Syndrome. Exploring the Psychiatric Manifestations of Primary Sjögren’s Syndrome: A Narrative Review Association of Baseline Serum Soluble Tumour Necrosis Factor Receptor Levels with the Response of Rheumatoid Arthritis to Janus Kinase Inhibitor Therapy. Primary Immune Thrombocytopenic Purpura (ITP) and ITP Associated with Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: A Review of Clinical Characteristics and Treatment Modalities Association of Cytokine IL-17, IL-4, IL-6, and IL-12 Gene Polymorphisms in Rheumatoid Arthritis Patients in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Bangladesh.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1