Literature DB >> 33156808

Development of Phenotyping Algorithms for the Identification of Organ Transplant Recipients: Cohort Study.

Lee Wheless1, Laura Baker1, LaVar Edwards1, Nimay Anand2, Kelly Birdwell3, Allison Hanlon1, Mary-Margaret Chren1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Studies involving organ transplant recipients (OTRs) are often limited to the variables collected in the national Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients database. Electronic health records contain additional variables that can augment this data source if OTRs can be identified accurately.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to develop phenotyping algorithms to identify OTRs from electronic health records.
METHODS: We used Vanderbilt's deidentified version of its electronic health record database, which contains nearly 3 million subjects, to develop algorithms to identify OTRs. We identified all 19,817 individuals with at least one International Classification of Diseases (ICD) or Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code for organ transplantation. We performed a chart review on 1350 randomly selected individuals to determine the transplant status. We constructed machine learning models to calculate positive predictive values and sensitivity for combinations of codes by using classification and regression trees, random forest, and extreme gradient boosting algorithms.
RESULTS: Of the 1350 reviewed patient charts, 827 were organ transplant recipients while 511 had no record of a transplant, and 12 were equivocal. Most patients with only 1 or 2 transplant codes did not have a transplant. The most common reasons for being labeled a nontransplant patient were the lack of data (229/511, 44.8%) or the patient being evaluated for an organ transplant (174/511, 34.1%). All 3 machine learning algorithms identified OTRs with overall >90% positive predictive value and >88% sensitivity.
CONCLUSIONS: Electronic health records linked to biobanks are increasingly used to conduct large-scale studies but have not been well-utilized in organ transplantation research. We present rigorously evaluated methods for phenotyping OTRs from electronic health records that will enable the use of the full spectrum of clinical data in transplant research. Using several different machine learning algorithms, we were able to identify transplant cases with high accuracy by using only ICD and CPT codes. ©Lee Wheless, Laura Baker, LaVar Edwards, Nimay Anand, Kelly Birdwell, Allison Hanlon, Mary-Margaret Chren. Originally published in JMIR Medical Informatics (http://medinform.jmir.org), 10.12.2020.

Entities:  

Keywords:  electronic health record; organ transplant recipients; phenotyping

Year:  2020        PMID: 33156808      PMCID: PMC7759442          DOI: 10.2196/18001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JMIR Med Inform


  16 in total

1.  Accuracy and Completeness of Clinical Coding Using ICD-10 for Ambulatory Visits.

Authors:  Jan Horsky; Elizabeth A Drucker; Harley Z Ramelson
Journal:  AMIA Annu Symp Proc       Date:  2018-04-16

2.  Validation of electronic medical record-based phenotyping algorithms: results and lessons learned from the eMERGE network.

Authors:  Katherine M Newton; Peggy L Peissig; Abel Ngo Kho; Suzette J Bielinski; Richard L Berg; Vidhu Choudhary; Melissa Basford; Christopher G Chute; Iftikhar J Kullo; Rongling Li; Jennifer A Pacheco; Luke V Rasmussen; Leslie Spangler; Joshua C Denny
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 4.497

3.  Accuracy of Inpatient International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification Coding for Cytomegalovirus After Kidney Transplantation.

Authors:  C A Q Santos; D C Brennan; M A Olsen
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  2015 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 1.066

4.  PheKB: a catalog and workflow for creating electronic phenotype algorithms for transportability.

Authors:  Jacqueline C Kirby; Peter Speltz; Luke V Rasmussen; Melissa Basford; Omri Gottesman; Peggy L Peissig; Jennifer A Pacheco; Gerard Tromp; Jyotishman Pathak; David S Carrell; Stephen B Ellis; Todd Lingren; Will K Thompson; Guergana Savova; Jonathan Haines; Dan M Roden; Paul A Harris; Joshua C Denny
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2016-03-28       Impact factor: 4.497

5.  Validity of skin cancer malignancy reporting to the Organ Procurement Transplant Network: A cohort study.

Authors:  Giorgia L Garrett; Joyce T Yuan; Thuzar M Shin; Sarah T Arron
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2017-10-12       Impact factor: 11.527

6.  Assessment of tissue allograft safety monitoring with administrative healthcare databases: a pilot project using Medicare data.

Authors:  Sanjaya Dhakal; Dale R Burwen; Laura L Polakowski; Craig E Zinderman; Robert P Wise
Journal:  Cell Tissue Bank       Date:  2013-07-04       Impact factor: 1.522

7.  Big Data, Predictive Analytics, and Quality Improvement in Kidney Transplantation: A Proof of Concept.

Authors:  T R Srinivas; D J Taber; Z Su; J Zhang; G Mour; D Northrup; A Tripathi; J E Marsden; W P Moran; P D Mauldin
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2017-01-04       Impact factor: 8.086

8.  Spectrum of cancer risk among US solid organ transplant recipients.

Authors:  Eric A Engels; Ruth M Pfeiffer; Joseph F Fraumeni; Bertram L Kasiske; Ajay K Israni; Jon J Snyder; Robert A Wolfe; Nathan P Goodrich; A Rana Bayakly; Christina A Clarke; Glenn Copeland; Jack L Finch; Mary Lou Fleissner; Marc T Goodman; Amy Kahn; Lori Koch; Charles F Lynch; Margaret M Madeleine; Karen Pawlish; Chandrika Rao; Melanie A Williams; David Castenson; Michael Curry; Ruth Parsons; Gregory Fant; Monica Lin
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-11-02       Impact factor: 157.335

9.  Validation of Living Donor Nephrectomy Codes.

Authors:  Ngan N Lam; Krista L Lentine; Scott Klarenbach; Manish M Sood; Paul J Kuwornu; Kyla L Naylor; Gregory A Knoll; S Joseph Kim; Ann Young; Amit X Garg
Journal:  Can J Kidney Health Dis       Date:  2018-04-09

10.  Comparison of Cancer Diagnoses Between the US Solid Organ Transplant Registry and Linked Central Cancer Registries.

Authors:  E L Yanik; L M Nogueira; L Koch; G Copeland; C F Lynch; K S Pawlish; J L Finch; A R Kahn; B Y Hernandez; D L Segev; R M Pfeiffer; J J Snyder; B L Kasiske; E A Engels
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2016-05-12       Impact factor: 9.369

View more
  2 in total

1.  Leveraging electronic health record data for clinical trial planning by assessing eligibility criteria's impact on patient count and safety.

Authors:  James R Rogers; Jovana Pavisic; Casey N Ta; Cong Liu; Ali Soroush; Ying Kuen Cheung; George Hripcsak; Chunhua Weng
Journal:  J Biomed Inform       Date:  2022-02-18       Impact factor: 6.317

2.  Differences in Skin Cancer Rates by Transplanted Organ Type and Patient Age After Organ Transplant in White Patients.

Authors:  Lee Wheless; Nimay Anand; Allison Hanlon; Mary-Margaret Chren
Journal:  JAMA Dermatol       Date:  2022-09-28       Impact factor: 11.816

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.