The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Postmarketing Surveillance Based on Electronic Patient Records: The IPCI Project
Abstract
Researchers claim that data in electronic patient records can be used for a variety of purposes including individual patient care, management, and resource planning for scientific research. Our objective in the project Integrated Primary Care Information (IPCI) was to assess whether the electronic patient records of Dutch general practitioners contain sufficient data to perform studies in the area of postmarketing surveillance studies. We determined the data requirements for postmarketing surveil-lance studies, implemented additional software in the electronic patient records of the general practitioner, developed an organization to monitor the use of data, and performed validation studies to test the quality of the data. Analysis of the data requirements showed that additional software had to be installed to collect data that is not recorded in routine practice. To avoid having to obtain informed consent from each enrolled patient, we developed IPCI as a semianonymous system: both patients and participating general practitioners are anonymous for the researchers. Under specific circumstances, the researcher can contact indirectly (through a trusted third party) the physician that made the data available. Only the treating general practitioner is able to decode the identity of his patients. A Board of Supervisors predominantly consisting of participating general practitioners monitors the use of data. Validation studies show the data can be used for postmarketing surveillance. With additional software to collect data not normally recorded in routine practice, data from electronic patient record of general practitioners can be used for postmarketing surveillance.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Incidence of facial pain in the general population
Koopman, J. S. H. A., Dieleman, J. P., Huygen, F. J., de Mos, M., Martin, C. G. M., & Sturkenboom, M. C. J. M. (2009) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2009.08.023 · Cited by 489
Self-citationIncidence rates and treatment of neuropathic pain conditions in the general population ☆
Dieleman, J. P., Kerklaan, J., Huygen, F. J. P. M., Bouma, P. A. D., & Sturkenboom, M. C. J. M. (2008) · Pain · doi:10.1016/j.pain.2008.03.002 · Cited by 353
Self-citationSystematic review of scope and quality of electronic patient record data in primary care
Thiru, K., Hassey, A., & Sullivan, F. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7398.1070 · Cited by 342
Alexander, M., Loomis, A. K., van der Lei, J., Duarte-Salles, T., Prieto-Alhambra, D., Ansell, D., Pasqua, A., Lapi, F., Rijnbeek, P., Mosseveld, M., et al. (2019) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12916-019-1321-x · Cited by 317
Self-citationAlexander, M., Loomis, A. K., van der Lei, J., Duarte-Salles, T., Prieto-Alhambra, D., Ansell, D., Pasqua, A., Lapi, F., Rijnbeek, P., Mosseveld, M., et al. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l5367 · Cited by 254
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- van der Lei, J., Mosseveld, B. M. T., van Wijk, M. A. M., van der Linden, P. D., Sturkenboom, M. C. J. M., van Bemmel, J. H., & Vlug, A. E.
- Venue
- Methods of Information in Medicine
- Publisher
- Georg Thieme Verlag KG
- Published
- 1999
- Volume
- 38
- Issue
- 04/05
- Pages
- 339-344
- ISSN
- 0026-1270 (ISSN-L)
- 2511-705X
- OpenAlex
- W28670821
- Cited by
- 224
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 5.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Postmarketing Surveillance Based on Electronic Patient Records: The IPCI Project. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1055/s-0038-1634402
- The paper
- van der Lei, J., Mosseveld, B. M. T., van Wijk, M. A. M., van der Linden, P. D., Sturkenboom, M. C. J. M., van Bemmel, J. H., & Vlug, A. E. (1999). Postmarketing Surveillance Based on Electronic Patient Records: The IPCI Project. Methods of Information in Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1634402
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.