MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385897663 · doi:10.1111/ppe.13003

Accuracy of aspirin prophylaxis for preeclampsia prevention documentation within a large administrative dataset

2023· article· en· W4385897663 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lauren Tailor, Renee-Gabrielle Fajardo, Joel G. Ray, Isabelle Malhamé, Sonia M. Grandi

Bibliographic record

VenuePaediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and preeclampsia studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreSt. Michael's HospitalWestern UniversityMcGill UniversityInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of TorontoSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenPublic Health Ontario
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsAspirinMedicinePreeclampsiaConfidence intervalPregnancyMedical recordDatabaseObstetricsPediatricsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Low-dose aspirin prophylaxis is recommended for women at risk of preeclampsia. Capturing aspirin prophylaxis within administrative databases can be challenging since it is an over-the-counter medication. The Better Outcome Registry and Network (BORN) database, a perinatal health registry in Ontario, Canada, includes a formal variable that captures aspirin prophylaxis for preeclampsia. This variable has not been formally validated. OBJECTIVES: To assess the accuracy of the aspirin prophylaxis variable in the BORN database against an electronic medical record (EMR). METHODS: This validation study comprised 200 randomly selected women who had a livebirth at St. Michael's Hospital (SMH) in Toronto, Ontario, from January 2018 to July 2022. Recorded aspirin prophylaxis in pregnancy and maternal sociodemographic characteristics were independently extracted by two abstractors. Accuracy of aspirin prophylaxis use in the BORN database was compared to that in the SMH EMR, expressed as sensitivity, specificity, positive (PPV) and negative predictive values (NPV), Cohen's kappa (κ), and overall percent agreement, with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Sensitivity analyses were performed to account for missing or unclear aspirin prophylaxis use. RESULTS: Among 200 women, 24 (12.0%) received aspirin prophylaxis - 12.5% within the SMH EMR and 8.0% in the BORN database. Women using aspirin were older (37.0 vs 33.0 years) and had higher median gravidity (3 vs. 2). Sensitivity and specificity of the BORN aspirin prophylaxis variable were 62.5% (95% CI 40.6, 81.2) and 100.0% (95% CI 97.3, 100.0), respectively. The corresponding positive and negative predictive values were 100.0% (95% CI 78.2, 100.0), and 93.8% (95% CI 88.6, 97.1), respectively. Cohen's κ was 0.74 (95% CI 0.58, 0.90), and overall percent agreement was 94.4% (95% CI 87.1, 100.0). CONCLUSIONS: Aspirin use within the BORN database, based on a standard variable field, appears accurate enough for the potential use in epidemiological studies of aspirin prophylaxis for preeclampsia or as a covariate in related studies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.514

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePaediatric and Perinatal EpidemiologySame topicPregnancy and preeclampsia studiesFrench-language works237,207