Literature DB >> 25577596

Development and validation of an algorithm for classifying colonoscopy indication.

Jeffrey K Lee1, Christopher D Jensen2, Alexander Lee1, Chyke A Doubeni3, Ann G Zauber4, Theodore R Levin2, Wei K Zhao2, Douglas A Corley2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Accurate determination of colonoscopy indication is required for managing clinical programs and performing research; however, existing algorithms that use available electronic databases (eg, diagnostic and procedure codes) have yielded limited accuracy.
OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate an algorithm for classifying colonoscopy indication that uses comprehensive electronic medical data sources.
DESIGN: We developed an algorithm for classifying colonoscopy indication by using commonly available electronic diagnostic, pathology, cancer, and laboratory test databases and validated its performance characteristics in comparison with a comprehensive review of patient medical records. We also evaluated the influence of each data source on the algorithm's performance characteristics.
SETTING: Kaiser Permanente Northern California healthcare system. PATIENTS: A total of 300 patients who underwent colonoscopy between 2007 and 2010.
INTERVENTIONS: Colonoscopy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: Algorithm's sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value (PPV) for classifying screening, surveillance, and diagnostic colonoscopies. The reference standard was the indication assigned after comprehensive medical record review.
RESULTS: For screening indications, the algorithm's sensitivity was 88.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 80.4%-91.7%), specificity was 91.7% (95% CI, 87.0%-95.1%), and PPV was 83.3% (95% CI, 74.7%-90.0%). For surveillance indications, the algorithm's sensitivity was 93.4% (95% CI, 86.2%-97.5%), specificity was 92.8% (95% CI, 88.4%-95.9%), and PPV was 85.0% (95% CI, 76.5%-91.4%). The algorithm's sensitivity, specificity, and PPV for diagnostic indications were 81.4% (95% CI, 73.0%-88.1%), 96.8% (95% CI, 93.2%-98.8%), and 93.9% (95% CI, 87.2%-97.7%), respectively. LIMITATIONS: Validation was confined to a single healthcare system.
CONCLUSION: An algorithm that uses commonly available modern electronic medical data sources yielded a high sensitivity, specificity, and PPV for classifying screening, surveillance, and diagnostic colonoscopy indications. This algorithm had greater accuracy than the indication listed on the colonoscopy report.
Copyright © 2015 American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25577596      PMCID: PMC4340717          DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2014.07.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc        ISSN: 0016-5107            Impact factor:   9.427


  14 in total

1.  Ascertainment of colonoscopy indication using administrative data.

Authors:  Deborah A Fisher; Janet M Grubber; John M Castor; Cynthia J Coffman
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 3.199

2.  How many endoscopies are performed for colorectal cancer screening? Results from CDC's survey of endoscopic capacity.

Authors:  Laura C Seeff; Thomas B Richards; Jean A Shapiro; Marion R Nadel; Diane L Manninen; Leslie S Given; Fred B Dong; Linda D Winges; Matthew T McKenna
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2004-12       Impact factor: 22.682

3.  An automated data algorithm to distinguish screening and diagnostic colorectal cancer endoscopy exams.

Authors:  Reina Haque; Vicki Chiu; Kapil R Mehta; Ann M Geiger
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2005

Review 4.  Quality indicators for colonoscopy.

Authors:  Douglas K Rex; John L Petrini; Todd H Baron; Amitabh Chak; Jonathan Cohen; Stephen E Deal; Brenda Hoffman; Brian C Jacobson; Klaus Mergener; Bret T Petersen; Michael A Safdi; Douglas O Faigel; Irving M Pike
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 9.427

5.  How good is that agreement?

Authors:  T Byrt
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 4.822

6.  Confirmation of family cancer history reported in a population-based survey.

Authors:  Phuong L Mai; Anne O Garceau; Barry I Graubard; Marsha Dunn; Timothy S McNeel; Lou Gonsalves; Mitchell H Gail; Mark H Greene; Gordon B Willis; Louise Wideroff
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2011-05-11       Impact factor: 13.506

7.  Use of colonoscopy to screen asymptomatic adults for colorectal cancer. Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study Group 380.

Authors:  D A Lieberman; D G Weiss; J H Bond; D J Ahnen; H Garewal; G Chejfec
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-07-20       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  Prevalence of colon polyps detected by colonoscopy screening in asymptomatic black and white patients.

Authors:  David A Lieberman; Jennifer L Holub; Matthew D Moravec; Glenn M Eisen; Dawn Peters; Cynthia D Morris
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-09-24       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup.

Authors:  S J Winawer; A G Zauber; M N Ho; M J O'Brien; L S Gottlieb; S S Sternberg; J D Waye; M Schapiro; J H Bond; J F Panish
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1993-12-30       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Long-term colorectal-cancer incidence and mortality after lower endoscopy.

Authors:  Reiko Nishihara; Kana Wu; Paul Lochhead; Teppei Morikawa; Xiaoyun Liao; Zhi Rong Qian; Kentaro Inamura; Sun A Kim; Aya Kuchiba; Mai Yamauchi; Yu Imamura; Walter C Willett; Bernard A Rosner; Charles S Fuchs; Edward Giovannucci; Shuji Ogino; Andrew T Chan
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-09-19       Impact factor: 91.245

View more
  18 in total

1.  Association Between Primary Care Visits and Colorectal Cancer Screening Outcomes in the Era of Population Health Outreach.

Authors:  Ethan A Halm; Elisabeth F Beaber; Dale McLerran; Jessica Chubak; Douglas A Corley; Carolyn M Rutter; Chyke A Doubeni; Jennifer S Haas; Bijal A Balasubramanian
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2016-06-08       Impact factor: 5.128

2.  Changes in screening colonoscopy following Medicare reimbursement and cost-sharing changes.

Authors:  Lina D Song; Joseph P Newhouse; Xabier Garcia-De-Albeniz; John Hsu
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2019-04-02       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Validation of 5 key colonoscopy-related data elements from Ontario health administrative databases compared to the clinical record: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Jill Tinmouth; Rinku Sutradhar; Ning Liu; Nancy N Baxter; Lawrence Paszat; Linda Rabeneck
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2018-08-13

4.  Evaluating Screening Participation, Follow-up, and Outcomes for Breast, Cervical, and Colorectal Cancer in the PROSPR Consortium.

Authors:  William E Barlow; Elisabeth F Beaber; Berta M Geller; Aruna Kamineni; Yingye Zheng; Jennifer S Haas; Chun R Chao; Carolyn M Rutter; Ann G Zauber; Brian L Sprague; Ethan A Halm; Donald L Weaver; Jessica Chubak; V Paul Doria-Rose; Sarah Kobrin; Tracy Onega; Virginia P Quinn; Marilyn M Schapira; Anna N A Tosteson; Douglas A Corley; Celette Sugg Skinner; Mitchell D Schnall; Katrina Armstrong; Cosette M Wheeler; Michael J Silverberg; Bijal A Balasubramanian; Chyke A Doubeni; Dale McLerran; Jasmin A Tiro
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2020-03-01       Impact factor: 13.506

5.  Endoscopist fatigue estimates and colonoscopic adenoma detection in a large community-based setting.

Authors:  Alexander Lee; Christopher D Jensen; Amy R Marks; Wei K Zhao; Chyke A Doubeni; Ann G Zauber; Virginia P Quinn; Theodore R Levin; Douglas A Corley
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2016-10-01       Impact factor: 9.427

6.  Metformin use and risk of colorectal adenoma after polypectomy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Authors:  Amy R Marks; Ralph A Pietrofesa; Christopher D Jensen; Alexis Zebrowski; Douglas A Corley; Chyke A Doubeni
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2015-09-16       Impact factor: 4.254

7.  What makes a "good" colonoscopy quality indicator?

Authors:  Jeffrey K Lee; Douglas A Corley
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 9.427

8.  Long-term Risk of Colorectal Cancer and Related Death After Adenoma Removal in a Large, Community-based Population.

Authors:  Jeffrey K Lee; Christopher D Jensen; Theodore R Levin; Chyke A Doubeni; Ann G Zauber; Jessica Chubak; Aruna S Kamineni; Joanne E Schottinger; Nirupa R Ghai; Natalia Udaltsova; Wei K Zhao; Bruce H Fireman; Charles P Quesenberry; E John Orav; Celette S Skinner; Ethan A Halm; Douglas A Corley
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2019-10-04       Impact factor: 22.682

9.  Effects of Organized Colorectal Cancer Screening on Cancer Incidence and Mortality in a Large Community-Based Population.

Authors:  Theodore R Levin; Douglas A Corley; Christopher D Jensen; Joanne E Schottinger; Virginia P Quinn; Ann G Zauber; Jeffrey K Lee; Wei K Zhao; Natalia Udaltsova; Nirupa R Ghai; Alexander T Lee; Charles P Quesenberry; Bruce H Fireman; Chyke A Doubeni
Journal:  Gastroenterology       Date:  2018-07-19       Impact factor: 22.682

10.  Index colonoscopy-related risk factors for postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers.

Authors:  Theodore A Tollivoro; Christopher D Jensen; Amy R Marks; Wei K Zhao; Joanne E Schottinger; Virginia P Quinn; Nirupa R Ghai; Ann G Zauber; Chyke A Doubeni; Theodore R Levin; Bruce Fireman; Charles P Quesenberry; Douglas A Corley
Journal:  Gastrointest Endosc       Date:  2018-08-23       Impact factor: 9.427

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.