455 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 15076812)
1. Comparison of the Elixhauser and Charlson/Deyo methods of comorbidity measurement in administrative data.
Southern DA; Quan H; Ghali WA
Med Care; 2004 Apr; 42(4):355-60. PubMed ID: 15076812
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Comparison of different comorbidity measures for use with administrative data in predicting short- and long-term mortality.
Chu YT; Ng YY; Wu SC
BMC Health Serv Res; 2010 May; 10():140. PubMed ID: 20507593
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Comparing the performance of the Charlson/Deyo and Elixhauser comorbidity measures across five European countries and three conditions.
Gutacker N; Bloor K; Cookson R
Eur J Public Health; 2015 Feb; 25 Suppl 1():15-20. PubMed ID: 25690125
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Risk adjustment performance of Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in ICD-9 and ICD-10 administrative databases.
Li B; Evans D; Faris P; Dean S; Quan H
BMC Health Serv Res; 2008 Jan; 8():12. PubMed ID: 18194561
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A disease-specific comorbidity index for predicting mortality in patients admitted to hospital with a cardiac condition.
Azzalini L; Chabot-Blanchet M; Southern DA; Nozza A; Wilton SB; Graham MM; Gravel GM; Bluteau JP; Rouleau JL; Guertin MC; Jolicoeur EM
CMAJ; 2019 Mar; 191(11):E299-E307. PubMed ID: 30885968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of the performance of two comorbidity measures, with and without information from prior hospitalizations.
Stukenborg GJ; Wagner DP; Connors AF
Med Care; 2001 Jul; 39(7):727-39. PubMed ID: 11458137
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Assessing and using comorbidity measures in elderly veterans with lower extremity amputations.
Kurichi JE; Stineman MG; Kwong PL; Bates BE; Reker DM
Gerontology; 2007; 53(5):255-9. PubMed ID: 17435390
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Comorbidity scores for administrative data benefited from adaptation to local coding and diagnostic practices.
Bottle A; Aylin P
J Clin Epidemiol; 2011 Dec; 64(12):1426-33. PubMed ID: 21764557
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Stroke: the Elixhauser Index for comorbidity adjustment of in-hospital case fatality.
Zhu H; Hill MD
Neurology; 2008 Jul; 71(4):283-7. PubMed ID: 18645167
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data.
Quan H; Sundararajan V; Halfon P; Fong A; Burnand B; Luthi JC; Saunders LD; Beck CA; Feasby TE; Ghali WA
Med Care; 2005 Nov; 43(11):1130-9. PubMed ID: 16224307
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Predicting in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing complex gastrointestinal surgery: determining the optimal risk adjustment method.
Grendar J; Shaheen AA; Myers RP; Parker R; Vollmer CM; Ball CG; Quan ML; Kaplan GG; Al-Manasra T; Dixon E
Arch Surg; 2012 Feb; 147(2):126-35. PubMed ID: 22006854
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. A modification of the Elixhauser comorbidity measures into a point system for hospital death using administrative data.
van Walraven C; Austin PC; Jennings A; Quan H; Forster AJ
Med Care; 2009 Jun; 47(6):626-33. PubMed ID: 19433995
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. The Elixhauser comorbidity method outperforms the Charlson index in predicting inpatient death after orthopaedic surgery.
Menendez ME; Neuhaus V; van Dijk CN; Ring D
Clin Orthop Relat Res; 2014 Sep; 472(9):2878-86. PubMed ID: 24867450
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Categorized diagnoses and procedure records in an administrative database improved mortality prediction.
Yamana H; Matsui H; Sasabuchi Y; Fushimi K; Yasunaga H
J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Sep; 68(9):1028-35. PubMed ID: 25596112
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Predicting In-Hospital Mortality in Elderly Patients With Cervical Spine Fractures: A Comparison of the Charlson and Elixhauser Comorbidity Measures.
Menendez ME; Ring D; Harris MB; Cha TD
Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 2015 Jun; 40(11):809-15. PubMed ID: 25785957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Charlson scores based on ICD-10 administrative data were valid in assessing comorbidity in patients undergoing urological cancer surgery.
Nuttall M; van der Meulen J; Emberton M
J Clin Epidemiol; 2006 Mar; 59(3):265-73. PubMed ID: 16488357
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. A systematic review of the Charlson comorbidity index using Canadian administrative databases: a perspective on risk adjustment in critical care research.
Needham DM; Scales DC; Laupacis A; Pronovost PJ
J Crit Care; 2005 Mar; 20(1):12-9. PubMed ID: 16015512
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Comparison of the performance of the CMS Hierarchical Condition Category (CMS-HCC) risk adjuster with the Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidity measures in predicting mortality.
Li P; Kim MM; Doshi JA
BMC Health Serv Res; 2010 Aug; 10():245. PubMed ID: 20727154
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Impact of different measures of comorbid disease on predicted mortality of intensive care unit patients.
Johnston JA; Wagner DP; Timmons S; Welsh D; Tsevat J; Render ML
Med Care; 2002 Oct; 40(10):929-40. PubMed ID: 12395026
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. New ICD-10 version of the Multipurpose Australian Comorbidity Scoring System outperformed Charlson and Elixhauser comorbidities in an older population.
Toson B; Harvey LA; Close JC
J Clin Epidemiol; 2016 Nov; 79():62-69. PubMed ID: 27101889
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
