Spine surgery database: A Turkish registry for spinal disorders;Omurga cerrahisi veri tabanı: Türkçe Omurga hastalıkları arşivi

Turkish Neurosurgery

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 223-230

  Utku, Semih ^a   Baysal, Hulusi ^a   Zileli, Mehmet ^b  

^a DOKUZ EYLUL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b EGE UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Database; Outcome analysis; Spine surgery

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; CHILD; COMPUTER INTERFACE; COMPUTER PROGRAM; FACTUAL DATABASE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MIDDLE AGED; QUESTIONNAIRE; REGISTER; SPINAL DISEASES; SPINE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TURKEY; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CHILD; DATABASES, FACTUAL; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; QUESTIONNAIRES; REGISTRIES; SOFTWARE; SPINAL DISEASES; SPINE; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TURKEY; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77953838209     PISSN: 10195149     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Aebi M, Grob D: SSE Spine Tango: A European Spine Registry promoted by the Spine Society of Europe (SSE). Eur Spine J 13(8):661-662, 2004.
2. Arts DG, De Keizer NF, Scheffer GJ: Defining and improving data quality in medical registries: A literature review, case study, and generic framework. J Am Med Inform Assoc 9(6):600-611, 2002.
3. Bombardier C: Outcome assessments in the evaluation of treatment of spinal disorders. Introduction. Spine 25(24):3097-3099, 2000.
4. Bray T,Paoli J,Sperberg-McQueen C.M: Extensible markup language. World Wide Web J. 4(2):29-66, 1997.
5. Buffone GJ, Moreau D: Aconceptual framework for managing clinical processes. Comput Nurs 15(2):53-60, 1997.
6. Chamberlin D.D, Astrahan M.M, Blasgen M.W, Gray J.N, King W.F, Lindsay B.G, et al: A history and evaluation of System R. ACM 24(10):632-646, 1981.
7. Codd E.F: Relational database: A practical foundation for productivity. Commun ACM 25(2):109-117, 1982.
8. Drolet BC, Johnson KB: Categorizing the world of registries. J Biomed Inform 41(6):1009-1020, 2008.
9. Engh CA, Engh CA Jr, Nagowski JP, Hopper RH Jr. Database production and maintenance. Clin Orthop Relat Res 421:35-42, 2004.
10. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, O'Brien JP: The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66 (8):271-273, 1980.
11. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB: The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25 (22):2940-2952, 2000.
12. Fritzell P, Hagg O, Wessberg P, Nordwall A: Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. 2001 Volvo Award Winner in Clinical Studies: Lumbar fusion versus nonsurgical treatment for chronic low back pain: A multicenter randomized controlled trial from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study Group. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26(23):2521-2532, 2001.
13. Fritzell P, Stromqvist B, Hagg O: Apractical approach to spine registers in Europe: The Swedish experience. Eur Spine J 15:57-63, 2006.
14. Gerszten PC: Outcomes research: A review. Neurosurgery 43(5):1146-1156, 1998.
15. Gladman DD, Menter A: Introduction/overview on clinical registries. Ann Rheum Dis. 64(2):101-102, 2005.
16. Grotle M, Brox JI, Vollestad NK: Cross-cultural adaptation of the Norwegian versions of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire and the Oswestry Disability Index. J Rehabil Med 35(5):241-247, 2003.
17. Hanscom B, Lurie JD, Homa K, Weinstein JN: Computerized questionnaires and the quality of survey data. Spine 27(16):1797-801, 2002
18. Levy B: Evolving to clinical terminology. J Healthc Inf Manag 18(3):37-43, 2004
19. Lundstrom M, Stenevi U, Thorburn W: The Swedish National Cataract Register: A 9-year review. Acta Ophthalmol Scand 80(3):248-257, 2002.
20. Malvestuto F.M, Moscarini M: Query Evaluability in Statistical Databases. IEEE Trans. on Knowl and Data Eng 2(4):425-430, 1990.
21. McDonald CJ: The barriers to electronic medical record systems and how to overcome them. J Am Med Inform Assoc 4(3):213-221, 1997.
22. Mullins IM, Siadaty MS, Lyman J, Scully K, Garrett CT, Miller WG, et al: Data mining and clinical data repositories: Insights from a 667,000 patient data set. Comput Biol Med 36(12):1351-1377, 2006
23. Poissant L, Pereira J, Tamblyn R, Kawasumi Y: The impact of electronic health records on time efficiency of physicians and nurses: A systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 12(5):505-516, 2005
24. Röder C, El-Kerdi A, Grob D, Aebi M: A European spine registry. Eur Spine J 11(4):303-307, 2002
25. Sicotte C, Denis JL, Lehoux P: The computer based patient record: A strategic issue in process innovation. J Med Syst 22(6):431-43, 1998
26. Solomon DJ, Henry RC, Hogan JG, Van Amburg GH, Taylor J: Evaluation and implementation of public health registries. Public Health Rep 106(2):142-150, 1991
27. Sujansky WV: The benefits and challenges of an electronic medical record: Much more than a "word-processed" patient chart. West J Med 169(3):176-783, 1998
28. Tian F, DeWitt D.J, Chen J, Zhang C: The design and performance evaluation of alternative XML storage strategies. SIGMOD Rec 31(1):5-10, 2002
29. Walker J, Pan E, Johnston D, Adler-Milstein J, Bates DW, Middleton B: The value of health care information exchange and interoperability. Health Aff (Millwood) Suppl Web Exclusives:W5-10-W5-18, 2005
30. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD: The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). Med Care 30(6):473-483, 1992
31. Weinstein JN, Deyo RA: Clinical research: Issues in data collection. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 25(24):3104-3109, 2000
32. Zubcevic S, Dozic M, Catibusic F, Suljevic-Dropic V: The value of hospital data bases in the quality of patient care. Med Arh 58(1 Suppl 2):131-133, 2004