Abdool S Yasseen1,2,3, Jeffrey C Kwong1,2,3,4,5, Rafal Kustra1, Laura Holder3, Hannah Chung3, Liane Macdonald1,2, Naveed Z Janjua6, Tony Mazzulli2,7,8, Jordan Feld1,2,3,4, Natasha S Crowcroft9,10,11,12. 1. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 2. Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Canada. 3. ICES, Toronto, Canada. 4. University Health Network, Toronto, Canada. 5. Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 6. Hepatitis Testers Cohort, British Columbia Centre for Diseases Control, Vancouver, Canada. 7. Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 8. Department of Microbiology, Mount Sinai Hospital/University Health Network, Toronto, Canada. 9. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. natasha.crowcroft@utoronto.ca. 10. ICES, Toronto, Canada. natasha.crowcroft@utoronto.ca. 11. Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. natasha.crowcroft@utoronto.ca. 12. Department of Microbiology, Mount Sinai Hospital/University Health Network, Toronto, Canada. natasha.crowcroft@utoronto.ca.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the criterion validity of using diagnosis codes for hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) to identify infections. METHODS: Using linked laboratory and administrative data in Ontario, Canada, from January 2004 to December 2014, we validated HBV/HCV diagnosis codes against laboratory-confirmed infections. Performance measures (sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value) were estimated via cross-validated logistic regression and we explored variations by varying time windows from 1 to 5 years before (i.e., prognostic prediction) and after (i.e., diagnostic prediction) the date of laboratory confirmation. Subgroup analyses were performed among immigrants, males, baby boomers, and females to examine the robustness of these measures. RESULTS: A total of 1,599,023 individuals were tested for HBV and 840,924 for HCV, with a resulting 41,714 (2.7%) and 58,563 (7.0%) infections identified, respectively. HBV/HCV diagnosis codes ± 3 years of laboratory confirmation showed high specificity (99.9% HBV; 99.8% HCV), moderate positive predictive value (70.3% HBV; 85.8% HCV), and low sensitivity (12.8% HBV; 30.8% HCV). Varying the time window resulted in limited changes to performance measures. Diagnostic models consistently outperformed prognostic models. No major differences were observed among subgroups. CONCLUSION: HBV/HCV codes should not be the only source used for monitoring the population burden of these infections, due to low sensitivity and moderate positive predictive values. These results underscore the importance of ongoing laboratory and reportable disease surveillance systems for monitoring viral hepatitis in Ontario.
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the criterion validity of using diagnosis codes for hepatitis B virus (HBV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) to identify infections. METHODS: Using linked laboratory and administrative data in Ontario, Canada, from January 2004 to December 2014, we validated HBV/HCV diagnosis codes against laboratory-confirmed infections. Performance measures (sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value) were estimated via cross-validated logistic regression and we explored variations by varying time windows from 1 to 5 years before (i.e., prognostic prediction) and after (i.e., diagnostic prediction) the date of laboratory confirmation. Subgroup analyses were performed among immigrants, males, baby boomers, and females to examine the robustness of these measures. RESULTS: A total of 1,599,023 individuals were tested for HBV and 840,924 for HCV, with a resulting 41,714 (2.7%) and 58,563 (7.0%) infections identified, respectively. HBV/HCV diagnosis codes ± 3 years of laboratory confirmation showed high specificity (99.9% HBV; 99.8% HCV), moderate positive predictive value (70.3% HBV; 85.8% HCV), and low sensitivity (12.8% HBV; 30.8% HCV). Varying the time window resulted in limited changes to performance measures. Diagnostic models consistently outperformed prognostic models. No major differences were observed among subgroups. CONCLUSION: HBV/HCV codes should not be the only source used for monitoring the population burden of these infections, due to low sensitivity and moderate positive predictive values. These results underscore the importance of ongoing laboratory and reportable disease surveillance systems for monitoring viral hepatitis in Ontario.
Entities:
Keywords:
Health administrative data; Immigrants; Validation study; Viral hepatitis
Authors: J R Kramer; J A Davila; E D Miller; P Richardson; T P Giordano; H B El-Serag Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2007-11-08 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Carmine Rossi; Ian Shrier; Lee Marshall; Sonya Cnossen; Kevin Schwartzman; Marina B Klein; Guido Schwarzer; Chris Greenaway Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Jeffrey C Kwong; Sujitha Ratnasingham; Michael A Campitelli; Nick Daneman; Shelley L Deeks; Douglas G Manuel; Vanessa G Allen; Ahmed M Bayoumi; Aamir Fazil; David N Fisman; Andrea S Gershon; Effie Gournis; E Jenny Heathcote; Frances B Jamieson; Prabhat Jha; Kamran M Khan; Shannon E Majowicz; Tony Mazzulli; Allison J McGeer; Matthew P Muller; Abhishek Raut; Elizabeth Rea; Robert S Remis; Rita Shahin; Alissa J Wright; Brandon Zagorski; Natasha S Crowcroft Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-09-04 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Michael Klompas; Gillian Haney; Daniel Church; Ross Lazarus; Xuanlin Hou; Richard Platt Journal: PLoS One Date: 2008-07-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Carla Osiowy; Ken Swidinsky; Sarah Haylock-Jacobs; Matthew D Sadler; Scott Fung; David Wong; Gerald Y Minuk; Karen E Doucette; Philip Wong; Edward Tam; Curtis Cooper; Alnoor Ramji; Mang Ma; Carmine Nudo; Keith Tsoi; Carla S Coffin Journal: JHEP Rep Date: 2022-02-22