Chan Gao1, Run Fan2, Gregory D Ayers2, Ayush Giri3, Kindred Harris1,4, Ravi Atreya5, Pedro L Teixeira5, Nitin B Jain1,3,6. 1. Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA. 2. Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA. 3. Division of Epidemiology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA. 4. Faculty of Medicine, University of California (Los Angeles), Los Angeles, CA, USA. 5. Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA. 6. Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A lack of studies with large sample sizes of patients with rotator cuff tears is a barrier to performing clinical and genomic research. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate an electronic medical record (EMR)-based algorithm to identify individuals with and without rotator cuff tear. DESIGN: We used a deidentified version of the EMR of more than 2 million subjects. A screening algorithm was applied to classify subjects into likely rotator cuff tear and likely normal rotator cuff groups. From these subjects, 500 likely rotator cuff tear and 500 likely normal rotator cuff were randomly chosen for algorithm development. Chart review of all 1000 subjects confirmed the true phenotype of rotator cuff tear or normal rotator cuff based on magnetic resonance imaging and operative report. An algorithm was then developed based on logistic regression and validation of the algorithm was performed. RESULTS: The variables significantly predicting rotator cuff tear included the number of times a Current Procedural Terminology code related to rotator cuff procedures was used (odds ratio [OR] = 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-6.8 for ≥3 vs 0), the number of times a term related to rotator cuff lesions occurred in radiology reports (OR = 2.2; 95% CI: 1.2-4.1 for ≥1 vs 0), and the number of times a term related to rotator cuff lesions occurred in physician notes (OR = 4.5; 95% CI: 2.2-9.1 for 1 or 2 times vs 0). This phenotyping algorithm had a specificity of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.79-0.95) for rotator cuff tear, area under the curve (AUC) of 0.842, and diagnostic likelihood ratios (DLRs), DLR+ and DLR- of 5.94 (95% CI: 3.07-11.48) and 0.363 (95% CI: 0.291-0.453). CONCLUSION: Our informatics algorithm enables identification of cohorts of individuals with and without rotator cuff tear from an EMR-based data set with moderate accuracy.
BACKGROUND: A lack of studies with large sample sizes of patients with rotator cuff tears is a barrier to performing clinical and genomic research. OBJECTIVE: To develop and validate an electronic medical record (EMR)-based algorithm to identify individuals with and without rotator cuff tear. DESIGN: We used a deidentified version of the EMR of more than 2 million subjects. A screening algorithm was applied to classify subjects into likely rotator cuff tear and likely normal rotator cuff groups. From these subjects, 500 likely rotator cuff tear and 500 likely normal rotator cuff were randomly chosen for algorithm development. Chart review of all 1000 subjects confirmed the true phenotype of rotator cuff tear or normal rotator cuff based on magnetic resonance imaging and operative report. An algorithm was then developed based on logistic regression and validation of the algorithm was performed. RESULTS: The variables significantly predicting rotator cuff tear included the number of times a Current Procedural Terminology code related to rotator cuff procedures was used (odds ratio [OR] = 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-6.8 for ≥3 vs 0), the number of times a term related to rotator cuff lesions occurred in radiology reports (OR = 2.2; 95% CI: 1.2-4.1 for ≥1 vs 0), and the number of times a term related to rotator cuff lesions occurred in physician notes (OR = 4.5; 95% CI: 2.2-9.1 for 1 or 2 times vs 0). This phenotyping algorithm had a specificity of 0.89 (95% CI: 0.79-0.95) for rotator cuff tear, area under the curve (AUC) of 0.842, and diagnostic likelihood ratios (DLRs), DLR+ and DLR- of 5.94 (95% CI: 3.07-11.48) and 0.363 (95% CI: 0.291-0.453). CONCLUSION: Our informatics algorithm enables identification of cohorts of individuals with and without rotator cuff tear from an EMR-based data set with moderate accuracy.
Authors: Anthony Maher; Warren Leigh; Matt Brick; Simon Young; James Millar; Cameron Walker; Michael Caughey Journal: ANZ J Surg Date: 2017-07-12 Impact factor: 1.872
Authors: Katherine P Liao; Tianxi Cai; Vivian Gainer; Sergey Goryachev; Qing Zeng-treitler; Soumya Raychaudhuri; Peter Szolovits; Susanne Churchill; Shawn Murphy; Isaac Kohane; Elizabeth W Karlson; Robert M Plenge Journal: Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken) Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 4.794
Authors: Pedro L Teixeira; Wei-Qi Wei; Robert M Cronin; Huan Mo; Jacob P VanHouten; Robert J Carroll; Eric LaRose; Lisa A Bastarache; S Trent Rosenbloom; Todd L Edwards; Dan M Roden; Thomas A Lasko; Richard A Dart; Anne M Nikolai; Peggy L Peissig; Joshua C Denny Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2016-08-07 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Warren R Dunn; John E Kuhn; Rosemary Sanders; Qi An; Keith M Baumgarten; Julie Y Bishop; Robert H Brophy; James L Carey; G Brian Holloway; Grant L Jones; C Benjamin Ma; Robert G Marx; Eric C McCarty; Sourav K Poddar; Matthew V Smith; Edwin E Spencer; Armando F Vidal; Brian R Wolf; Rick W Wright Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2014-05-21 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Thomas R Roos; Andrew K Roos; Andrew L Avins; Marwa A Ahmed; John P Kleimeyer; Michael Fredericson; John P A Ioannidis; Jason L Dragoo; Stuart K Kim Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-12-11 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Katherine P Liao; Tianxi Cai; Guergana K Savova; Shawn N Murphy; Elizabeth W Karlson; Ashwin N Ananthakrishnan; Vivian S Gainer; Stanley Y Shaw; Zongqi Xia; Peter Szolovits; Susanne Churchill; Isaac Kohane Journal: BMJ Date: 2015-04-24