American Journal of Epidemiology Advance Access originally published online on June 7, 2007
American Journal of Epidemiology 2007 166(2):117-124; doi:10.1093/aje/kwm139
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PRACTICE OF EPIDEMIOLOGY |
Validity of Preeclampsia-related Diagnoses Recorded in a National Hospital Registry and in a Postpartum Interview of the Women
1 Maternal Nutrition Group, Danish Epidemiology Science Centre, Statens Serum Institut, Copenhagen, Denmark
2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, H:S Hvidovre Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Hvidovre, Denmark
3 Ultrasound Clinic, Juliane Marie Center, H:S Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
Correspondence to Åse K. Klemmensen, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, H:S Hvidovre Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Kettegård Allé 30, DK-2650 Hvidovre, Denmark (e-mail: klem{at}dadlnet.dk).
Received for publication June 2, 2005. Accepted for publication June 8, 2006.
In a population-based sample, the authors examined the validity of preeclampsia and related diagnoses recorded in a mandatory Danish national hospital discharge registry and in a standardized telephone interview of women who gave birth between 1998 and 2002. Using a "gold standard" for preeclampsia defined in accordance with the guidelines from the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the authors reviewed hospital charts of 3,039 women and found that 61of 88 preeclampsia cases (69.3%) and 24 of 55 cases of serious subtypes of preeclampsia (43.6%) were recorded as such by the registry. A total of 21 of 2,951 women without preeclampsia (0.71%) had a preeclampsia diagnosis in the registry. All registrations of serious subtypes of preeclampsia reflected true cases. The positive predictive value of a preeclampsia diagnosis in the registry was 74.4%. Including interview data reduced the sample size to 2,307 women. In this sample, of 62 women with preeclampsia, 45 (72.6%) reported in the interview to have had preeclampsia. Of 2,245 women with no preeclampsia, 31 (1.4%) reported to have had preeclampsia. The positive predictive value of the women's own report on preeclampsia was 59.2%. The authors conclude, for the purpose of etiologic studies, that the registry had acceptable validity, whereas the usefulness of self-reported information may be limited.
interviews; postpartum period; pre-eclampsia; registries; reproducibility of results; women
Abbreviations: ICD-10, International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision
Editor's note: An invited commentary on this article appears on page 125, and the authors' response is published on page 128.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
Related articles in Am. J. Epidemiol.:
- Invited Commentary: Identifying Women with Hypertension during Pregnancy—Is High Specificity Sufficient?
- William M. Callaghan
Am. J. Epidemiol. 2007 166: 125-127.[Abstract] [Full Text] - Østerdal et al. Respond to "Identifying Women with Hypertension during Pregnancy"
- ML Østerdal, ÅK Klemmensen, A Tabor, and SF Olsen
Am. J. Epidemiol. 2007 166: 128-129.[Extract] [Full Text]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  A. Pinborg, O. Lidegaard, N. la Cour Freiesleben, and A. N. Andersen Vanishing twins: a predictor of small-for-gestational age in IVF singletons Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2007; 22(10): 2707 - 2714. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Osterdal, A. Klemmensen, A Tabor, and S. Olsen Osterdal et al. Respond to "Identifying Women with Hypertension during Pregnancy" Am. J. Epidemiol., July 15, 2007; 166(2): 128 - 129. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|