Coding OSICS sports injury diagnoses in epidemiological studies : Does the background of the coder matter?
- Finch, Caroline, Orchard, John, Twomey, Dara, Saleem, Muhammad Saad, Ekegren, Christina, Lloyd, David, Elliott, Bruce
- Authors: Finch, Caroline , Orchard, John , Twomey, Dara , Saleem, Muhammad Saad , Ekegren, Christina , Lloyd, David , Elliott, Bruce
- Date: 2012
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: British Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol.48, p.552-556.
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objective: To compare Orchard Sports Injury Classification System (OSICS-10) sports medicine diagnoses assigned by a clinical and non-clinical coder. Design: Assessment of intercoder agreement. Setting: Community Australian football. Participants: 1082 standardised injury surveillance records. Main outcome measurements: Direct comparison of the four-character hierarchical OSICS-10 codes assigned by two independent coders (a sports physician and an epidemiologist). Adjudication by a third coder (biomechanist). Results: The coders agreed on the first character 95% of the time and on the first two characters 86% of the time. They assigned the same four-digit OSICS-10 code for only 46% of the 1082 injuries. The majority of disagreements occurred for the third character; 85% were because one coder assigned a non-specific 'X' code. The sports physician code was deemed correct in 53% of cases and the epidemiologist in 44%. Reasons for disagreement included the physician not using all of the collected information and the epidemiologist lacking specific anatomical knowledge. Conclusions: Sports injury research requires accurate identification and classification of specific injuries and this study found an overall high level of agreement in coding according to OSICS-10. The fact that the majority of the disagreements occurred for the third OSICS character highlights the fact that increasing complexity and diagnostic specificity in injury coding can result in a loss of reliability and demands a high level of anatomical knowledge. Injury report form details need to reflect this level of complexity and data management teams need to include a broad range of expertise. Copyright Article author (or their employer) 2012.
- Authors: Finch, Caroline , Orchard, John , Twomey, Dara , Saleem, Muhammad Saad , Ekegren, Christina , Lloyd, David , Elliott, Bruce
- Date: 2012
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: British Journal of Sports Medicine, Vol.48, p.552-556.
- Relation: http://purl.org/au-research/grants/nhmrc/565900
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objective: To compare Orchard Sports Injury Classification System (OSICS-10) sports medicine diagnoses assigned by a clinical and non-clinical coder. Design: Assessment of intercoder agreement. Setting: Community Australian football. Participants: 1082 standardised injury surveillance records. Main outcome measurements: Direct comparison of the four-character hierarchical OSICS-10 codes assigned by two independent coders (a sports physician and an epidemiologist). Adjudication by a third coder (biomechanist). Results: The coders agreed on the first character 95% of the time and on the first two characters 86% of the time. They assigned the same four-digit OSICS-10 code for only 46% of the 1082 injuries. The majority of disagreements occurred for the third character; 85% were because one coder assigned a non-specific 'X' code. The sports physician code was deemed correct in 53% of cases and the epidemiologist in 44%. Reasons for disagreement included the physician not using all of the collected information and the epidemiologist lacking specific anatomical knowledge. Conclusions: Sports injury research requires accurate identification and classification of specific injuries and this study found an overall high level of agreement in coding according to OSICS-10. The fact that the majority of the disagreements occurred for the third OSICS character highlights the fact that increasing complexity and diagnostic specificity in injury coding can result in a loss of reliability and demands a high level of anatomical knowledge. Injury report form details need to reflect this level of complexity and data management teams need to include a broad range of expertise. Copyright Article author (or their employer) 2012.
What is the definition of sports-related concussion : A systematic review
- McCrory, Paul, Feddermann-Demont, Nina, Dvorak, Jiri, Cassidy, David, McIntosh, Andrew, Vos, Pieter, Echemendia, Ruben, Meeuwisse, Willem, Tarnutzer, Alexander
- Authors: McCrory, Paul , Feddermann-Demont, Nina , Dvorak, Jiri , Cassidy, David , McIntosh, Andrew , Vos, Pieter , Echemendia, Ruben , Meeuwisse, Willem , Tarnutzer, Alexander
- Date: 2017
- Type: Text , Journal article , Review
- Relation: British Journal of Sports Medicine Vol. 51, no. 11 (2017), p. 877-887
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objectives: Various definitions for concussion have been proposed, each having its strengths and weaknesses. We reviewed and compared current definitions and identified criteria necessary for an operational definition of sports-related concussion (SRC) in preparation of the 5th Concussion Consensus Conference (Berlin, Germany). We also assessed the role of biomechanical studies in informing an operational definition of SRC. Design: This is a systematic literature review. Data sources: Data sources include MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials and SPORT Discus (accessed 14 September 2016). Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Eligibility criteria were studies reporting (clinical) criteria for diagnosing SRC and studies containing SRC impact data. Results: Out of 1601 articles screened, 36 studies were included (2.2%), 14 reported on criteria for SRC definitions and 22 on biomechanical aspects of concussions. Six different operational definitions focusing on clinical findings and their dynamics were identified. Biomechanical studies were obtained almost exclusively on American football players. Angular and linear head accelerations linked to clinically confirmed concussions demonstrated considerable individual variation. Summary/conclusions: SRC is a traumatic brain injury that is defined as a complex pathophysiological process affecting the brain, induced by biomechanical forces with several common features that help define its nature. Limitations identified include that the current criteria for diagnosing SRC are clinically oriented and that there is no gold/standard to assess their diagnostic properties. A future, more valid definition of SRC would better identify concussed players by demonstrating high predictive positive/negative values. Currently, the use of helmet-based systems to study the biomechanics of SRC is limited to few collision sports. New approaches need to be developed to provide objective markers for SRC. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved.
- Authors: McCrory, Paul , Feddermann-Demont, Nina , Dvorak, Jiri , Cassidy, David , McIntosh, Andrew , Vos, Pieter , Echemendia, Ruben , Meeuwisse, Willem , Tarnutzer, Alexander
- Date: 2017
- Type: Text , Journal article , Review
- Relation: British Journal of Sports Medicine Vol. 51, no. 11 (2017), p. 877-887
- Full Text:
- Reviewed:
- Description: Objectives: Various definitions for concussion have been proposed, each having its strengths and weaknesses. We reviewed and compared current definitions and identified criteria necessary for an operational definition of sports-related concussion (SRC) in preparation of the 5th Concussion Consensus Conference (Berlin, Germany). We also assessed the role of biomechanical studies in informing an operational definition of SRC. Design: This is a systematic literature review. Data sources: Data sources include MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Central Register of Clinical Trials and SPORT Discus (accessed 14 September 2016). Eligibility criteria for selecting studies: Eligibility criteria were studies reporting (clinical) criteria for diagnosing SRC and studies containing SRC impact data. Results: Out of 1601 articles screened, 36 studies were included (2.2%), 14 reported on criteria for SRC definitions and 22 on biomechanical aspects of concussions. Six different operational definitions focusing on clinical findings and their dynamics were identified. Biomechanical studies were obtained almost exclusively on American football players. Angular and linear head accelerations linked to clinically confirmed concussions demonstrated considerable individual variation. Summary/conclusions: SRC is a traumatic brain injury that is defined as a complex pathophysiological process affecting the brain, induced by biomechanical forces with several common features that help define its nature. Limitations identified include that the current criteria for diagnosing SRC are clinically oriented and that there is no gold/standard to assess their diagnostic properties. A future, more valid definition of SRC would better identify concussed players by demonstrating high predictive positive/negative values. Currently, the use of helmet-based systems to study the biomechanics of SRC is limited to few collision sports. New approaches need to be developed to provide objective markers for SRC. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved.
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »