Validation of perinatal data in the Discharge Abstract Database of the Canadian Institute for Health Information
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared perinatal information submitted to the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) hospitalization database with information submitted to the Nova Scotia Atlee Perinatal Database (NSAPD) in order to assess the accuracy of the CIHI data. Procedures such as Caesarean delivery were coded accurately (i.e. sensitivity of 99.8%; specificity of 98.7%). Postpartum hemorrhage, induction of labour and severe intraventricular hemorrhage also had sensitivity and specificity rates above 85% and 95%, respectively. Some diagnoses, defined differently in the two databases, were less accurately coded, e.g. respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) had a sensitivity of 50.9% and a specificity of 99.8%. Restriction to more severe forms of the disease improved accuracy, e.g. restriction of RDS to severe RDS in the NSAPD and identification of severe RDS in the CIHI database, using codes for RDS and intubation, resulted in a sensitivity of 100% and a specificity of 99.6%. Our study supports the use of CIHI data for national surveillance of perinatal morbidity, with the caveat that an understanding of clinical practice and sensitivity analyses to identify robust findings be used to facilitate inference.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".