Literature DB >> 33558981

Accuracy of identifying hospital acquired venous thromboembolism by administrative coding: implications for big data and machine learning research.

Tiffany Pellathy1, Melissa Saul2, Gilles Clermont2, Artur W Dubrawski3, Michael R Pinsky2, Marilyn Hravnak4.   

Abstract

Big data analytics research using heterogeneous electronic health record (EHR) data requires accurate identification of disease phenotype cases and controls. Overreliance on ground truth determination based on administrative data can lead to biased and inaccurate findings. Hospital-acquired venous thromboembolism (HA-VTE) is challenging to identify due to its temporal evolution and variable EHR documentation. To establish ground truth for machine learning modeling, we compared accuracy of HA-VTE diagnoses made by administrative coding to manual review of gold standard diagnostic test results. We performed retrospective analysis of EHR data on 3680 adult stepdown unit patients identifying HA-VTE. International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision (ICD-9-CM) codes for VTE were identified. 4544 radiology reports associated with VTE diagnostic tests were screened using terminology extraction and then manually reviewed by a clinical expert to confirm diagnosis. Of 415 cases with ICD-9-CM codes for VTE, 219 were identified with acute onset type codes. Test report review identified 158 new-onset HA-VTE cases. Only 40% of ICD-9-CM coded cases (n = 87) were confirmed by a positive diagnostic test report, leaving the majority of administratively coded cases unsubstantiated by confirmatory diagnostic test. Additionally, 45% of diagnostic test confirmed HA-VTE cases lacked corresponding ICD codes. ICD-9-CM coding missed diagnostic test-confirmed HA-VTE cases and inaccurately assigned cases without confirmed VTE, suggesting dependence on administrative coding leads to inaccurate HA-VTE phenotyping. Alternative methods to develop more sensitive and specific VTE phenotype solutions portable across EHR vendor data are needed to support case-finding in big-data analytics.
© 2021. This is a U.S. government work and not under copyright protection in the U.S.; foreign copyright protection may apply.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Administrative coding; Big data analytics; Electronic health record data; Machine learning; Phenotyping; Venous thromboembolism

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33558981      PMCID: PMC8349368          DOI: 10.1007/s10877-021-00664-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Monit Comput        ISSN: 1387-1307            Impact factor:   1.977


  52 in total

1.  The validity of ICD codes coupled with imaging procedure codes for identifying acute venous thromboembolism using administrative data.

Authors:  Ghazi S Alotaibi; Cynthia Wu; Ambikaipakan Senthilselvan; M Sean McMurtry
Journal:  Vasc Med       Date:  2015-04-01       Impact factor: 3.239

2.  Why ICD-10 is worth the trouble.

Authors:  Sue Bowman
Journal:  J AHIMA       Date:  2008-03

3.  Gleaning knowledge from data in the intensive care unit.

Authors:  Michael R Pinsky; Artur Dubrawski
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2014-09-15       Impact factor: 21.405

4.  Preprocessing structured clinical data for predictive modeling and decision support. A roadmap to tackle the challenges.

Authors:  José Carlos Ferrão; Mónica Duarte Oliveira; Filipe Janela; Henrique M G Martins
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2016-12-07       Impact factor: 2.342

Review 5.  Informatics and machine learning to define the phenotype.

Authors:  Anna Okula Basile; Marylyn DeRiggi Ritchie
Journal:  Expert Rev Mol Diagn       Date:  2018-02-16       Impact factor: 5.225

6.  Improving accuracy of International Classification of Diseases codes for venous thromboembolism in administrative data.

Authors:  Kristen M Sanfilippo; Tzu-Fei Wang; Brian F Gage; Weijian Liu; Kenneth R Carson
Journal:  Thromb Res       Date:  2015-01-14       Impact factor: 3.944

7.  Failure-to-rescue: comparing definitions to measure quality of care.

Authors:  Jeffrey H Silber; Patrick S Romano; Amy K Rosen; Yanli Wang; Orit Even-Shoshan; Kevin G Volpp
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Clinical validation of the AHRQ postoperative venous thromboembolism patient safety indicator.

Authors:  Katherine E Henderson; Angela j Recktenwald; Richard M Reichley; Thomas C Bailey; Brian M Waterman; Rebecca L Diekemper; Patricia E Storey; Belinda K Ireland; Wm Claiborne Dunagan
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf       Date:  2009-07

9.  What Does Venous Thromboembolism Mean in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program?

Authors:  Katherine L Florecki; Oluwafemi P Owodunni; Mujan Varasteh Kia; Marvin C Borja; Christine G Holzmueller; Brandyn D Lau; Martin Paul; Michael B Streiff; Elliott R Haut
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2020-02-28       Impact factor: 2.192

10.  Limitations of pulmonary embolism ICD-10 codes in emergency department administrative data: let the buyer beware.

Authors:  Kristin Burles; Grant Innes; Kevin Senior; Eddy Lang; Andrew McRae
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2017-06-08       Impact factor: 4.615

View more
  2 in total

1.  Developing and optimizing a computable phenotype for incident venous thromboembolism in a longitudinal cohort of patients with cancer.

Authors:  Ang Li; Wilson L da Costa; Danielle Guffey; Emily M Milner; Anthony K Allam; Karen M Kurian; Francisco J Novoa; Marguerite D Poche; Raka Bandyo; Carolina Granada; Courtney D Wallace; Neil A Zakai; Christopher I Amos
Journal:  Res Pract Thromb Haemost       Date:  2022-05-25

2.  Real-world Health Data and Precision for the Diagnosis of Acute Kidney Injury, Acute-on-Chronic Kidney Disease, and Chronic Kidney Disease: Observational Study.

Authors:  Karen Triep; Alexander Benedikt Leichtle; Martin Meister; Georg Martin Fiedler; Olga Endrich
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2022-01-25
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.