Measuring Comorbidity in Cardiovascular Research: A Systematic Review
Background. Everything known about the roles, relationships, and repercussions of comorbidity in cardiovascular disease is shaped by how comorbidity is currently measured. Objectives. To critically examine how comorbidity is measured in randomized controlled trials or clinical trials and prospective...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2013-01-01
|
| Series: | Nursing Research and Practice |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/563246 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850157634792980480 |
|---|---|
| author | Harleah G. Buck Jabar A. Akbar Sarah Jingying Zhang Janet A. Prvu Bettger |
| author_facet | Harleah G. Buck Jabar A. Akbar Sarah Jingying Zhang Janet A. Prvu Bettger |
| author_sort | Harleah G. Buck |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background. Everything known about the roles, relationships, and repercussions of comorbidity in cardiovascular disease is shaped by how comorbidity is currently measured. Objectives. To critically examine how comorbidity is measured in randomized controlled trials or clinical trials and prospective observational studies in acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), or stroke. Design. Systematic review of studies of hospitalized adults from MEDLINE CINAHL, PsychINFO, and ISI Web of Science Social Science databases. At least two reviewers screened and extracted all data. Results. From 1432 reviewed abstracts, 26 studies were included (AMI , HF , stroke ). Five studies used an instrument to measure comorbidity while the remaining used the presence or absence of an unsubstantiated list of individual diseases. Comorbidity data were obtained from 1–4 different sources with 35% of studies not reporting the source. A year-by-year analysis showed no changes in measurement. Conclusions. The measurement of comorbidity remains limited to a list of conditions without stated rationale or standards increasing the likelihood that the true impact is underestimated. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-2c2f3c331cfc467a9fcb41b1222a4940 |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 2090-1429 2090-1437 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2013-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Nursing Research and Practice |
| spelling | doaj-art-2c2f3c331cfc467a9fcb41b1222a49402025-08-20T02:24:07ZengWileyNursing Research and Practice2090-14292090-14372013-01-01201310.1155/2013/563246563246Measuring Comorbidity in Cardiovascular Research: A Systematic ReviewHarleah G. Buck0Jabar A. Akbar1Sarah Jingying Zhang2Janet A. Prvu Bettger3School of Nursing, The Pennsylvania State University, 201 Health and Human Development East, University Park, PA 16802, USASchool of Nursing, Duke University, Duke University Medical Center 3322, 307 Trent Drive, Durham, NC 27710, USASchool of Nursing, Duke University, Duke University Medical Center 3322, 307 Trent Drive, Durham, NC 27710, USASchool of Nursing, Duke University, Duke University Medical Center 3322, 307 Trent Drive, Durham, NC 27710, USABackground. Everything known about the roles, relationships, and repercussions of comorbidity in cardiovascular disease is shaped by how comorbidity is currently measured. Objectives. To critically examine how comorbidity is measured in randomized controlled trials or clinical trials and prospective observational studies in acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF), or stroke. Design. Systematic review of studies of hospitalized adults from MEDLINE CINAHL, PsychINFO, and ISI Web of Science Social Science databases. At least two reviewers screened and extracted all data. Results. From 1432 reviewed abstracts, 26 studies were included (AMI , HF , stroke ). Five studies used an instrument to measure comorbidity while the remaining used the presence or absence of an unsubstantiated list of individual diseases. Comorbidity data were obtained from 1–4 different sources with 35% of studies not reporting the source. A year-by-year analysis showed no changes in measurement. Conclusions. The measurement of comorbidity remains limited to a list of conditions without stated rationale or standards increasing the likelihood that the true impact is underestimated.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/563246 |
| spellingShingle | Harleah G. Buck Jabar A. Akbar Sarah Jingying Zhang Janet A. Prvu Bettger Measuring Comorbidity in Cardiovascular Research: A Systematic Review Nursing Research and Practice |
| title | Measuring Comorbidity in Cardiovascular Research: A Systematic Review |
| title_full | Measuring Comorbidity in Cardiovascular Research: A Systematic Review |
| title_fullStr | Measuring Comorbidity in Cardiovascular Research: A Systematic Review |
| title_full_unstemmed | Measuring Comorbidity in Cardiovascular Research: A Systematic Review |
| title_short | Measuring Comorbidity in Cardiovascular Research: A Systematic Review |
| title_sort | measuring comorbidity in cardiovascular research a systematic review |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/563246 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT harleahgbuck measuringcomorbidityincardiovascularresearchasystematicreview AT jabaraakbar measuringcomorbidityincardiovascularresearchasystematicreview AT sarahjingyingzhang measuringcomorbidityincardiovascularresearchasystematicreview AT janetaprvubettger measuringcomorbidityincardiovascularresearchasystematicreview |