OBJECTIVES: Reliable methods are needed to monitor the public health impact of changing laws and perceptions about marijuana. Structured and free-text emergency department (ED) visit data offer an opportunity to monitor the impact of these changes in near-real time. Our objectives were to (1) generate and validate a syndromic case definition for ED visits potentially related to marijuana and (2) describe a method for doing so that was less resource intensive than traditional methods. METHODS: We developed a syndromic case definition for ED visits potentially related to marijuana, applied it to BioSense 2.0 data from 15 hospitals in the Denver, Colorado, metropolitan area for the period September through October 2015, and manually reviewed each case to determine true positives and false positives. We used the number of visits identified by and the positive predictive value (PPV) for each search term and field to refine the definition for the second round of validation on data from February through March 2016. RESULTS: Of 126 646 ED visits during the first period, terms in 524 ED visit records matched ≥1 search term in the initial case definition (PPV, 92.7%). Of 140 932 ED visits during the second period, terms in 698 ED visit records matched ≥1 search term in the revised case definition (PPV, 95.7%). After another revision, the final case definition contained 6 keywords for marijuana or derivatives and 5 diagnosis codes for cannabis use, abuse, dependence, poisoning, and lung disease. CONCLUSIONS: Our syndromic case definition and validation method for ED visits potentially related to marijuana could be used by other public health jurisdictions to monitor local trends and for other emerging concerns.
OBJECTIVES: Reliable methods are needed to monitor the public health impact of changing laws and perceptions about marijuana. Structured and free-text emergency department (ED) visit data offer an opportunity to monitor the impact of these changes in near-real time. Our objectives were to (1) generate and validate a syndromic case definition for ED visits potentially related to marijuana and (2) describe a method for doing so that was less resource intensive than traditional methods. METHODS: We developed a syndromic case definition for ED visits potentially related to marijuana, applied it to BioSense 2.0 data from 15 hospitals in the Denver, Colorado, metropolitan area for the period September through October 2015, and manually reviewed each case to determine true positives and false positives. We used the number of visits identified by and the positive predictive value (PPV) for each search term and field to refine the definition for the second round of validation on data from February through March 2016. RESULTS: Of 126 646 ED visits during the first period, terms in 524 ED visit records matched ≥1 search term in the initial case definition (PPV, 92.7%). Of 140 932 ED visits during the second period, terms in 698 ED visit records matched ≥1 search term in the revised case definition (PPV, 95.7%). After another revision, the final case definition contained 6 keywords for marijuana or derivatives and 5 diagnosis codes for cannabis use, abuse, dependence, poisoning, and lung disease. CONCLUSIONS: Our syndromic case definition and validation method for ED visits potentially related to marijuana could be used by other public health jurisdictions to monitor local trends and for other emerging concerns.
Authors: Wendy W Chapman; Lee M Christensen; Michael M Wagner; Peter J Haug; Oleg Ivanov; John N Dowling; Robert T Olszewski Journal: Artif Intell Med Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 5.326
Authors: Brett R South; Brett Ray South; Wendy W Chapman; Wendy Chapman; Sylvain Delisle; Shuying Shen; Ericka Kalp; Trish Perl; Matthew H Samore; Adi V Gundlapalli Journal: AMIA Annu Symp Proc Date: 2008-11-06
Authors: Wendy W Chapman; John N Dowling; Atar Baer; David L Buckeridge; Dennis Cochrane; Michael A Conway; Peter Elkin; Jeremy Espino; Julia E Gunn; Craig M Hales; Lori Hutwagner; Mikaela Keller; Catherine Larson; Rebecca Noe; Anya Okhmatovskaia; Karen Olson; Marc Paladini; Matthew Scholer; Carol Sniegoski; David Thompson; Bill Lober Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2010 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Amy Ising; Scott Proescholdbell; Katherine J Harmon; Nidhi Sachdeva; Stephen W Marshall; Anna E Waller Journal: Inj Prev Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 2.399
Authors: Cees van den Wijngaard; Liselotte van Asten; Wilfrid van Pelt; Nico J D Nagelkerke; Robert Verheij; Albert J de Neeling; Arnold Dekkers; Marianne A B van der Sande; Hans van Vliet; Marion P G Koopmans Journal: Emerg Infect Dis Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 6.883
Authors: Tarek Alhamad; Farrukh M Koraishy; Ngan N Lam; Sreelatha Katari; Abhijit S Naik; Mark A Schnitzler; Huiling Xiao; David A Axelrod; Vikas R Dharnidharka; Henry Randall; Rosemary Ouseph; Dorry L Segev; Daniel C Brennan; Radhika Devraj; Bertram L Kasiske; Krista L Lentine Journal: Transplantation Date: 2019-11 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Melanie Bechard; Paula Cloutier; Isac Lima; Mina Salamatmanesh; Roger Zemek; Maala Bhatt; Sinthuja Suntharalingam; Paul Kurdyak; Melissa Baker; William Gardner Journal: CMAJ Open Date: 2022-02-08