Proteinuria impacts patient survival differentially based on clinical setting: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of cohorts from a single health system: Retrospective cohort study

BackgroundAdverse events (AEs) epidemiology is the first step to improve practice in the healthcare system. Usually, the preferred method used to estimate the magnitude of the problem is the retrospective cohort study design, with retrospective reviews of the medical records. However this data collection involves a sophisticated sampling plan, and a process of intensive review of sometimes very heavy and complex medical records. Cross-sectional survey is also a valid and feasible methodology to study AEs.ObjectivesThe aim of this study is to compare AEs detection using two different methodologies: cross-sectional versus retrospective cohort design.SettingSecondary and tertiary hospitals in five countries: Argentina, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico and Peru.ParticipantsThe IBEAS Study is a cross-sectional survey with a sample size of 11 379 patients. The retrospective cohort study was obtained from a 10% random sample proportional to hospital size from the entire IBEAS Study population.MethodsThis study compares the 1-day prevalence of the AEs obtained in the IBEAS Study with the incidence obtained through the retrospective cohort study.ResultsThe prevalence of patients with AEs was 10.47% (95% CI 9.90 to 11.03) (1191/11 379), while the cumulative incidence of the retrospective cohort study was 19.76% (95% CI 17.35% to 22.17%) (215/1088). In both studies the highest risk of suffering AEs was seen in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients. Comorbid patients and patients with medical devices showed higher risk.ConclusionThe retrospective cohort design, although requires more resources, allows to detect more AEs than the cross-sectional design.

Download Full-text

Fatty acids intake and outcomes of assisted reproduction in women referring to an Italian Fertility Service: cross sectional analysis of a prospective cohort study

Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics ◽

10.1111/jhn.12982 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Valentina De Cosmi ◽

Sonia Cipriani ◽

Fabio Parazzini ◽

Elena Ricci ◽

Giovanna Esposito ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Fatty Acids ◽

Cohort Study ◽

Assisted Reproduction ◽

Prospective Cohort Study ◽

Prospective Cohort ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Cross Sectional Analysis ◽

Sectional Analysis

Download Full-text

AAA screening in adults with ASD: a retrospective cohort study

Advances in Autism ◽

10.1108/aia-10-2020-0059 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽

Author(s):

Marios Adamou ◽

Sarah Louise Jones ◽

Stephanie Wetherhill

Keyword(s):

Cohort Study ◽

Clinical Setting ◽

Retrospective Cohort Study ◽

Retrospective Cohort ◽

Autism Spectrum ◽

Specialist Service ◽

Content Type ◽

Empathy Quotient ◽

Adults With Asd ◽

Diagnostic Outcome

Purpose The Adult Asperger Assessment (AAA), comprising the Autism Questionnaire, the Empathy Quiotient and the Relatives Questionnaire is a commonly used screening tool designed to identify adults who may benefit from a further clinical assessment for autism spectrum disorder. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the usefulness of this screening measure in a clinical setting. Design/methodology/approach This retrospective cohort study comprised of 192 service users referred for diagnostic assessment of Autism by a specialist service of the National Health Service. The authors evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of the AAA by investigating if the Autism Questionnaire, the Empathy Quiotient and the Relatives Questionnaire were able to predict the diagnostic outcome of Autism in a clinical setting. Findings Scores from the Relatives Questionnaire can accurately predict diagnostic outcome. No evidence of accuracy for the Autism Questionnaire or the Empathy Quotient was apparent. Based on the findings, the authors recommend clinicians are cautious when interpreting results of the AAA. Research limitations/implications It should be acknowledged that the results may not be generalisable to whole populations. Also, the authors used the full item versions of the scales; therefore, the findings are most applicable to studies which did similar. Originality/value This study highlights the need for investigation into the lack of validation of commonly used screening measures in autistic populations.

Download Full-text