Literature DB >> 31866433

Adapting electronic health records-derived phenotypes to claims data: Lessons learned in using limited clinical data for phenotyping.

Anna Ostropolets1, Christian Reich2, Patrick Ryan3, Ning Shang1, George Hripcsak4, Chunhua Weng5.   

Abstract

Algorithms for identifying patients of interest from observational data must address missing and inaccurate data and are desired to achieve comparable performance on both administrative claims and electronic health records data. However, administrative claims data do not contain the necessary information to develop accurate algorithms for disorders that require laboratory results, and this omission can result in insensitive diagnostic code-based algorithms. In this paper, we tested our assertion that the performance of a diagnosis code-based algorithm for chronic kidney disorder (CKD) can be improved by adding other codes indirectly related to CKD (e.g., codes for dialysis, kidney transplant, suspicious kidney disorders). Following the best practices from Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI), we adapted an electronic health record-based gold standard algorithm for CKD and then created algorithms that can be executed on administrative claims data and account for related data quality issues. We externally validated our algorithms on four electronic health record datasets in the OHDSI network. Compared to the algorithm that uses CKD diagnostic codes only, positive predictive value of the algorithms that use additional codes was slightly increased (47.4% vs. 47.9-48.5% respectively). The algorithms adapted from the gold standard algorithm can be used to infer chronic kidney disorder based on administrative claims data. We succeeded in improving the generalizability and consistency of the CKD phenotypes by using data and vocabulary standardized across the OHDSI network, although performance variability across datasets remains. We showed that identifying and addressing coding and data heterogeneity can improve the performance of the algorithms.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chronic kidney disorder; Data quality; Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI); Phenotyping; Portability; Reproducibility

Mesh:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31866433      PMCID: PMC7390483          DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2019.103363

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomed Inform        ISSN: 1532-0464            Impact factor:   6.317


  9 in total

1.  Validating a case definition for chronic kidney disease using administrative data.

Authors:  Paul E Ronksley; Marcello Tonelli; Hude Quan; Braden J Manns; Matthew T James; Fiona M Clement; Susan Samuel; Robert R Quinn; Pietro Ravani; Sony S Brar; Brenda R Hemmelgarn
Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant       Date:  2011-10-19       Impact factor: 5.992

2.  Identification of individuals with CKD from Medicare claims data: a validation study.

Authors:  Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Helen Mogun; Amanda R Patrick; Jerry Avorn; Daniel H Solomon
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 8.860

3.  Low rates of testing and diagnostic codes usage in a commercial clinical laboratory: evidence for lack of physician awareness of chronic kidney disease.

Authors:  Lesley A Stevens; George Fares; James Fleming; David Martin; Kalyani Murthy; Jiejing Qiu; Paul C Stark; Katrin Uhlig; Frederick Van Lente; Andrew S Levey
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2005-06-01       Impact factor: 10.121

4.  The definition, classification, and prognosis of chronic kidney disease: a KDIGO Controversies Conference report.

Authors:  Andrew S Levey; Paul E de Jong; Josef Coresh; Meguid El Nahas; Brad C Astor; Kunihiro Matsushita; Ron T Gansevoort; Bertram L Kasiske; Kai-Uwe Eckardt
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2010-12-08       Impact factor: 10.612

5.  Validation of the diagnostic algorithms for 5 chronic conditions in the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN): a Kingston Practice-based Research Network (PBRN) report.

Authors:  Amjed Kadhim-Saleh; Michael Green; Tyler Williamson; Duncan Hunter; Richard Birtwhistle
Journal:  J Am Board Fam Med       Date:  2013 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.657

6.  Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI): Opportunities for Observational Researchers.

Authors:  George Hripcsak; Jon D Duke; Nigam H Shah; Christian G Reich; Vojtech Huser; Martijn J Schuemie; Marc A Suchard; Rae Woong Park; Ian Chi Kei Wong; Peter R Rijnbeek; Johan van der Lei; Nicole Pratt; G Niklas Norén; Yu-Chuan Li; Paul E Stang; David Madigan; Patrick B Ryan
Journal:  Stud Health Technol Inform       Date:  2015

7.  From patient care to research: a validation study examining the factors contributing to data quality in a primary care electronic medical record database.

Authors:  Nathan Coleman; Gayle Halas; William Peeler; Natalie Casaclang; Tyler Williamson; Alan Katz
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2015-02-05       Impact factor: 2.497

8.  Detecting chronic kidney disease in population-based administrative databases using an algorithm of hospital encounter and physician claim codes.

Authors:  Jamie L Fleet; Stephanie N Dixon; Salimah Z Shariff; Robert R Quinn; Danielle M Nash; Ziv Harel; Amit X Garg
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2013-04-05       Impact factor: 2.388

9.  Erratum: Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) CKD-MBD Update Work Group. KDIGO 2017 Clinical Practice Guideline Update for the Diagnosis, Evaluation, Prevention, and Treatment of Chronic Kidney Disease-Mineral and Bone Disorder (CKD-MBD). Kidney Int Suppl. 2017;7:1-59.

Authors: 
Journal:  Kidney Int Suppl (2011)       Date:  2017-11-17
  9 in total
  5 in total

1.  Electronic phenotyping of health outcomes of interest using a linked claims-electronic health record database: Findings from a machine learning pilot project.

Authors:  Teresa B Gibson; Michael D Nguyen; Timothy Burrell; Frank Yoon; Jenna Wong; Sai Dharmarajan; Rita Ouellet-Hellstrom; Wei Hua; Yong Ma; Elande Baro; Sarah Bloemers; Cory Pack; Adee Kennedy; Sengwee Toh; Robert Ball
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2021-07-14       Impact factor: 4.497

2.  Data Consult Service: Can we use observational data to address immediate clinical needs?

Authors:  Anna Ostropolets; Philip Zachariah; Patrick Ryan; Ruijun Chen; George Hripcsak
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2021-09-18       Impact factor: 7.942

3.  Impact of Diverse Data Sources on Computational Phenotyping.

Authors:  Liwei Wang; Janet E Olson; Suzette J Bielinski; Jennifer L St Sauver; Sunyang Fu; Huan He; Mine S Cicek; Matthew A Hathcock; James R Cerhan; Hongfang Liu
Journal:  Front Genet       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 4.599

4.  Development and validation of algorithms to identify patients with chronic kidney disease and related chronic diseases across the Northern Territory, Australia.

Authors:  Winnie Chen; Asanga Abeyaratne; Gillian Gorham; Pratish George; Vijay Karepalli; Dan Tran; Christopher Brock; Alan Cass
Journal:  BMC Nephrol       Date:  2022-09-23       Impact factor: 2.585

5.  Deep phenotyping: Embracing complexity and temporality-Towards scalability, portability, and interoperability.

Authors:  Chunhua Weng; Nigam H Shah; George Hripcsak
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2020-04-23       Impact factor: 6.317

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.