MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404510691 · doi:10.33137/cpoj.v7i2.44089

EVALUATION OF THE SWEDEAMP DATABASE: FOCUS ON COVERAGE AND AMPUTATION LEVEL RATES

2024· article· en· W4404510691 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Anton Johannesson, Reynir Scheving, Karolin Lindgren Westlund, Þór Friðriksson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmputationFocus (optics)DatabaseComputer scienceMedicineSurgeryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The National Board of Health and Welfare manages several national registers in Sweden. This includes the Swedish National Inpatient Register (IPR), covering all surgical operations, and SwedeAmp, focusing on outcomes after lower limb amputations (LLA). However, coverage rates of amputation levels between these registers have not been externally analyzed. OBJECTIVE: To compare SwedeAmp's coverage with IPR for LLA cases and to assess SwedeAmp's accuracy in capturing LLA data. The goal of this study was also to identify potential discrepancies and establish benchmarks for common amputation levels. METHODOLOGY: Data from both registers, covering the years 2018 to 2023, were compared regarding the amputation levels and patient demographics. The coverage rate of the SwedeAmp register was calculated using SwedeAmp data as the numerator and IPR data as the denominator. FINDINGS: The IPR registry recorded 10,788 LLAs across 21 regions (67 hospitals). The SwedeAmp documented 5,246 LLAs covering 17 regions (36 hospitals), leaving 5,542 amputations unaccounted for, mainly due to regions or hospitals not participating in the SwedeAmp registry and lower registration rates in some areas. Key findings include: Achieving full coverage in SwedeAmp (17 regions) would require registering 9,305 LLAs. Both men and women over 85 years were significantly underrepresented. Thirteen regions in SwedeAmp obtained more than 40% coverage rate. 5 regions had more than 50% rate of above-knee amputations (range: 50.9% - 68.2%). 8 regions reporting more than 50% rate of below-knee amputations (range: 53.1% - 88.9%). Among the 67 hospitals performing LLAs, 36 reported to SwedeAmp. Six of these hospitals performed fewer than 10 LLAs over a six-year period. CONCLUSION: SwedeAmp captured 48.6% of initial LLAs in Sweden, highlighting the need for improved data completeness in LLA records, especially as only 13 regions achieved over 40% Coverage. For hospitals performing regular amputation, the proposed benchmark - coverage of ≥60%, with ≤36.3% for transfemoral amputation (TF), ≤8.4% for knee disarticulations (KD), and ≥55.3% for transtibial amputations (TT) – could serve as a target to enhance consistency and accuracy in reporting. Expanding coverage can improve the register's utility in tracking outcomes, setting national standards, aiding research, and supporting clinical decision-making. Layman's Abstract The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare manages different health records, including the Swedish National Inpatient Register (IPR), which tracks all surgeries, and SwedeAmp, which focuses on people who have had lower limb amputations. This study looked at how much of SwedeAmp’s data matches the IPR, aimed to identify differences and set standards for common types of amputations. We compared the levels of amputation and patient details between the two records to better understand their coverage. The IPR registered 10,788 lower limb amputations (LLAs) across 21 regions and 67 hospitals, while SwedeAmp reported 5,246 LLAs from 17 regions (36 hospitals), leaving 5,542 amputations unaccounted for. To achieve full coverage in SwedeAmp, 9,305 LLAs would need to be registered, representing 86.3% of all amputations in Sweden. Fewer men over 80 years and women over 85 years were included in the SwedeAmp registry compared to the IPR. Thirteen regions in SwedeAmp had a coverage rate of more than 40%. Five regions reported an above-knee amputation rate of over 50%, while eight regions had a below-knee amputation rate exceeding 50%. Among the 67 hospitals performing LLAs, 36 reported data to SwedeAmp. Six of these hospitals performed fewer than 10 LLAs over a six-year period. For hospitals performing regular amputations, a benchmark of ≥60% coverage, with ≤36.3% for transfemoral, ≤8.4% for knee disarticulations, and ≥55.3% for transtibial amputations, could improve consistency in reporting. Increasing SwedeAmp's participation would strengthen the reliability of national data, supporting better outcome tracking, research, and clinical standards. Article PDF Link: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/cpoj/article/view/44089/33369 How To Cite: Johannesson A.G, Scheving R, Westlund k.L, Fridriksson T. Evaluation of the SwedeAmp database: Focus on coverage and amputation level rates. Canadian Prosthetics & Orthotics Journal. 2024; Volume 7, Issue 2, No.2. https://doi.org/10.33137/cpoj.v7i2.44089 Corresponding Author: Anton G. Johannesson, PhD, CPOÖssur Clinics EMEA, Stockholm, Sweden.E-Mail: ajohannesson@ossur.comORCID ID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8729-458X

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designOther design
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Prosthetics & Orthotics JournalSame topicDiabetic Foot Ulcer Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207