Key result
The sensitivity of ICD-9-CM code 410 for classifying acute myocardial infarction was significantly greater in men (0.65) than women (0.60) and in Whites (0.67) than Blacks (0.50).
Why the study?
What is the validity of ICD-9-CM code 410 for identifying acute myocardial infarction compared to ARIC study criteria?
Population
154,836 coronary heart disease events involving hospitalization in four US communities between 1987 and 2000
Comparison
ICD-9-CM hospital discharge code 410 for acute… vs Event classification based on published…
Design
Cohort
Follow-up
1987-2000
Authors
Loading...
May bias AMI surveillance estimates by sex and race; leaves open the need for validated algorithms in diverse populations.
Observational (n=154,836)
Yes
What is the validity of ICD-9-CM code 410 for identifying acute myocardial infarction compared to ARIC study criteria?
The validity of ICD-9-CM code 410 for identifying AMI is generally stable but varies significantly by sex and race, highlighting the need for validation in surveillance studies.
Rosamond et al. (2004) conducted an observational in Acute Myocardial Infarction (n=154,836). ICD-9-CM hospital discharge code 410 vs. ARIC Study criteria was evaluated on Sensitivity of ICD-9-CM code 410 for classifying AMI. The sensitivity of ICD-9-CM code 410 for classifying acute myocardial infarction was significantly greater in men (0.65) than women (0.60) and in Whites (0.67) than Blacks (0.50).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: