| 1. |
- Aerts, Marc, et al.
(författare)
-
Pooled individual patient data from five countries were used to derive a clinical prediction rule for coronary artery disease in primary care.
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. - : Elsevier. - 0895-4356 .- 1878-5921. ; 81, s. 120-128
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- OBJECTIVE: To construct a clinical prediction rule for coronary artery disease (CAD) presenting with chest pain in primary care.STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Meta-Analysis using 3,099 patients from five studies. To identify candidate predictors, we used random forest trees, multiple imputation of missing values, and logistic regression within individual studies. To generate a prediction rule on the pooled data, we applied a regression model that took account of the differing standard data sets collected by the five studies.RESULTS: The most parsimonious rule included six equally weighted predictors: age ≥55 (males) or ≥65 (females) (+1); attending physician suspected a serious diagnosis (+1); history of CAD (+1); pain brought on by exertion (+1); pain feels like "pressure" (+1); pain reproducible by palpation (-1). CAD was considered absent if the prediction score is <2. The area under the ROC curve was 0.84. We applied this rule to a study setting with a CAD prevalence of 13.2% using a prediction score cutoff of <2 (i.e., -1, 0, or +1). When the score was <2, the probability of CAD was 2.1% (95% CI: 1.1-3.9%); when the score was ≥ 2, it was 43.0% (95% CI: 35.8-50.4%).CONCLUSIONS: Clinical prediction rules are a key strategy for individualizing care. Large data sets based on electronic health records from diverse sites create opportunities for improving their internal and external validity. Our patient-level meta-analysis from five primary care sites should improve external validity. Our strategy for addressing site-to-site systematic variation in missing data should improve internal validity. Using principles derived from decision theory, we also discuss the problem of setting the cutoff prediction score for taking action.
|
|
| 2. |
- André, Malin, 1949-
(författare)
-
Rules of Thumb and Management of Common Infections in General Practice
- 2004
-
Doktorsavhandling (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- This thesis deals with problem solving of general practitioners (GPs), which is explored with different methods and from different perspectives. The general aim was to explore and describe rules of thumb and to analyse the management of respiratory and urinary tract infections (RTI and UTI) in general practice in Sweden. The results are based upon focus group interviews concerning rules of thumb and a prospective diagnosis-prescription study concerning the management of patients allocated a diagnosis of RTI or UTI. In addition unpublished data are given from structured telephone interviews concerning specific rules of thumb in acute sinusitis and prevailing cough.GPs were able to verbalize their rules of thumb, which could be called tacit knowledge. A specific set of rules of thumb was used for rapid assessment when emergency and psychosocial problems were identified. Somatic problems seemed to be the expected, normal state. In the further consultation the rules of thumb seemed to be used in an act of balance between the individual and the general perspective. There was considerable variation between the rules of thumb of different GPs for patients with acute sinusitis and prevailing cough. In their rules of thumb the GPs seemed to integrate their medical knowledge and practical experience of the consultation. A high number of near-patient antigen tests to probe Streptococcus pyogenes (Strep A tests) and C-reactive protein (CRP) tests were performed in patients, where testing was not recommended. There was only a slight decrease in antibiotic prescribing in patients allocated a diagnosis of RTI examined with CRP in comparison with patients not tested. In general, the GPs in Sweden adhered to current guidelines for antibiotic prescribing. Phenoxymethylpenicillin (PcV) was the preferred antibiotic for most patients allocated a diagnosis of respiratory tract infection.In conclusion, the use of rules of thumb might explain why current practices prevail in spite of educational efforts. One way to change practice could be to identify and evaluate rules of thumb used by GPs and disseminate well adapted rules. The use of diagnostic tests in patients with infectious illnesses in general practice needs critical appraisal before introduction as well as continuing surveillance. The use of rules of thumb by GPs might be one explanation for variation in practice and irrational prescribing of antibiotics in patients with infectious conditions.
|
|
| 3. |
- Haasenritter, Joerg, et al.
(författare)
-
Coronary heart disease in primary care: accuracy of medical history and physical findings in patients with chest pain - a study protocol for a systematic review with individual patient data
- 2012
-
Ingår i: BMC Family Practice. - : BioMed Central. - 1471-2296. ; 13:81
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Chest pain is a common complaint in primary care, with coronary heart disease (CHD) being the most concerning of many potential causes. Systematic reviews on the sensitivity and specificity of symptoms and signs summarize the evidence about which of them are most useful in making a diagnosis. Previous meta-analyses are dominated by studies of patients referred to specialists. Moreover, as the analysis is typically based on study-level data, the statistical analyses in these reviews are limited while meta-analyses based on individual patient data can provide additional information. Our patient-level meta-analysis has three unique aims. First, we strive to determine the diagnostic accuracy of symptoms and signs for myocardial ischemia in primary care. Second, we investigate associations between study-or patient-level characteristics and measures of diagnostic accuracy. Third, we aim to validate existing clinical prediction rules for diagnosing myocardial ischemia in primary care. This article describes the methods of our study and six prospective studies of primary care patients with chest pain. Later articles will describe the main results. less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanMethods/Design: We will conduct a systematic review and IPD meta-analysis of studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of symptoms and signs for diagnosing coronary heart disease in primary care. We will perform bivariate analyses to determine the sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratios of individual symptoms and signs and multivariate analyses to explore the diagnostic value of an optimal combination of all symptoms and signs based on all data of all studies. We will validate existing clinical prediction rules from each of the included studies by calculating measures of diagnostic accuracy separately by study. less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanDiscussion: Our study will face several methodological challenges. First, the number of studies will be limited. Second, the investigators of original studies defined some outcomes and predictors differently. Third, the studies did not collect the same standard clinical data set. Fourth, missing data, varying from partly missing to fully missing, will have to be dealt with. Despite these limitations, we aim to summarize the available evidence regarding the diagnostic accuracy of symptoms and signs for diagnosing CHD in patients presenting with chest pain in primary care. less thanbrgreater than less thanbrgreater thanReview registration: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (University of York): CRD42011001170
|
|
