Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 28, 2026

A Metadata Extraction Approach for Clinical Case Reports to Enable Advanced Understanding of Biomedical Concepts
Published on: September 20, 2018
Identifying patients with medically unexplained physical symptoms in electronic medical records in primary care: a
Madelon den Boeft1, Johannes C van der Wouden, Trudie R Rydell-Lexmond
1Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, 1081 BT, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.denboeft@vumc.nl.
Background:
When medically unexplained physical symptoms (MUPS) become persistent, it may have major implications for the patient, the general practitioner (GP) and for society.Early identification of patients with MUPS in electronic medical records (EMRs) might contribute to prevention of persistent MUPS by creating awareness among GPs and providing an opportunity to start stepped care management. However, procedures for identification of patients with MUPS in EMRs are not well established yet. In this validation study we explore the test characteristics of an EMR screening method to identify patients with MUPS.
Methods:
The EMR screening method consists of three steps. First, all patients ≥ 18 years were included when they had five or more contacts in the last 12 months. Second, patients with known chronic conditions were excluded. Finally, patients were included with a MUPS syndrome or when they had three or more complaints suggestive for MUPS. We compared the results of the EMR screening method with scores on the Patient Health Questionnaire-15 (PHQ-15), which we used as reference test. We calculated test characteristics for various cut-off points.
Results:
From the 1223 patients in our dataset who completed the PHQ-15, 609 (49/8%) scored ≥ 5 on the PHQ-15. The EMR screening method detected 131/1223 (10.7%) as patients with MUPS. Of those, 102 (77.9%) scored ≥ 5 on the PHQ-15 and 53 (40.5%) scored ≥ 10. When compared with the PHQ-15 cut-off point ≥ 10, sensitivity and specificity were 0.30 and 0.93 and positive and negative predictive values were 0.40 and 0.89, respectively.
Conclusions:
The EMR screening method to identify patients with MUPS has a high specificity. However, many potential MUPS patients will be missed. Before using this method as a screening instrument for selecting patients who might benefit from structured care, its sensitivity needs to be improved while maintaining its specificity.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Methods of Documentation VII: EMR
Methods of Documentation II: POMR
Data Collection III
The principles to begin the physical assessment include conducting a comprehensive or problem-related history in a quiet, well-lit room, emphasizing privacy and comfort for the...
Assessment of the Cardiovascular System I: Subjective Data
Initial Enquiry
Ask the patient about their primary concern and thoroughly explore all reported symptoms.
Medical History
Investigate past illnesses affecting the cardiovascular system, such as angina, anemia, rheumatic fever, congenital heart disease, stroke, thrombophlebitis, dysrhythmias, varicosities
Inquire about symptoms...
Documentation of Nursing Diagnosis
In some settings, data-driven computerized decision support systems are in place, allowing for more accurate nursing diagnoses. The database within one of these systems includes diagnostic labels defining characteristics, activities, and indicators for nursing. A nurse enters...
Methods of Documentation V: CBE
In CBE, healthcare professionals establish predefined standards of practice that define what constitutes...

