Dataset Information

Validation of CKD and related conditions in existing data sets: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Accurate classification of individuals with kidney disease is vital to research and public health efforts aimed at improving health outcomes. Our objective is to identify and synthesize published literature evaluating the accuracy of existing data sources related to kidney disease. STUDY DESIGN:A systematic review of studies seeking to validate the accuracy of the underlying data relevant to kidney disease. SETTING & POPULATION:US-based and international studies covering a wide range of both outpatient and inpatient study populations. SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES:Any English-language study investigating the prevalence or cause of kidney disease, existence of comorbid conditions, or cause of death in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). All definitions and stages of CKD, including end-stage renal disease (ESRD), were accepted. INDEX TESTS:Presence of a kidney disease-related variable in existing data sets, including administrative data sets and disease registries. REFERENCE TESTS:Presence of a kidney disease-related variable defined using laboratory criteria or medical record review. RESULTS:30 studies were identified. Most studies investigated the accuracy of kidney disease reporting, comparing coded renal disease with that defined using estimated glomerular filtration rate. The sensitivity of coded renal disease varied widely (0.08-0.83). Specificity was higher, with all studies reporting values ?0.90. Studies evaluating the cause of CKD, comorbid conditions, and cause of death in patients with CKD used ESRD or transplant populations exclusively, and accuracy was highly variable compared with ESRD registry data. LIMITATIONS:Only English-language studies were evaluated. CONCLUSIONS:Given the heterogeneous results of validation studies, a variety of attributes of existing data sources, including the accuracy of individual data items within these sources, should be considered carefully before use in research, quality improvement, and public health efforts.

SUBMITTER: Grams ME

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2978782 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Validation of CKD and related conditions in existing data sets: A systematic review.

Grams Morgan E ME Plantinga Laura C LC Hedgeman Elizabeth E Saran Rajiv R Myers Gary L GL Williams Desmond E DE Powe Neil R NR

American journal of kidney diseases : the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation 20100806 1

<h4>Background</h4>Accurate classification of individuals with kidney disease is vital to research and public health efforts aimed at improving health outcomes. Our objective is to identify and synthesize published literature evaluating the accuracy of existing data sources related to kidney disease.<h4>Study design</h4>A systematic review of studies seeking to validate the accuracy of the underlying data relevant to kidney disease.<h4>Setting & population</h4>US-based and international studies ...[more]

PMID: 20692079

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundMental disorders are normally diagnosed exclusively on the basis of symptoms, which are identified from patients' interviews and self-reported experiences. To make mental health diagnoses and monitoring more objective, different solutions have been proposed such as digital phenotyping of mental health (DPMH), which can expand the ability to identify and monitor health conditions based on the interactions of people with digital technologies.ObjectiveThis article aims to identify and characterize the sensing applications and public data sets for DPMH from a technical perspective.MethodsWe performed a systematic review of scientific literature and data sets. We searched 8 digital libraries and 20 data set repositories to find results that met the selection criteria. We conducted a data extraction process from the selected articles and data sets. For this purpose, a form was designed to extract relevant information, thus enabling us to answer the research questions and identify open issues and research trends.ResultsA total of 31 sensing apps and 8 data sets were identified and reviewed. Sensing apps explore different context data sources (eg, positioning, inertial, ambient) to support DPMH studies. These apps are designed to analyze and process collected data to classify (n=11) and predict (n=6) mental states/disorders, and also to investigate existing correlations between context data and mental states/disorders (n=6). Moreover, general-purpose sensing apps are developed to focus only on contextual data collection (n=9). The reviewed data sets contain context data that model different aspects of human behavior, such as sociability, mood, physical activity, sleep, with some also being multimodal.ConclusionsThis systematic review provides in-depth analysis regarding solutions for DPMH. Results show growth in proposals for DPMH sensing apps in recent years, as opposed to a scarcity of public data sets. The review shows that there are features that can be measured on smart devices that can act as proxies for mental status and well-being; however, it should be noted that the combined evidence for high-quality features for mental states remains limited. DPMH presents a great perspective for future research, mainly to reach the needed maturity for applications in clinical settings.

Project description:IntroductionCognitive complaints in older adults may be indicative of progressive cognitive decline including Alzheimer's disease (AD), but also occur in other age-related chronic conditions, complicating identification of early AD symptoms. To better understand cognitive complaints in aging, we systematically reviewed the evidence to determine their prevalence and characterization among older adults with the most common age-related chronic conditions.MethodsThis systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement and the review protocol was prospectively registered with PROSPERO (ID: CRD42020153147). Searches were conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and ProQuest Dissertations & Theses A&I in June 2020. Two members of the review team independently determined article eligibility for inclusion and conducted quality appraisal. A narrative synthesis of results was used to integrate findings across studies and draw conclusions regarding the strength of the evidence in each chronic condition category.ResultsThirty-seven articles met eligibility criteria and were included in the review. Conditions represented were diabetes (n = 20), heart disease (n = 13), hypertension (n = 10), chronic lung disease (n = 5), arthritis (n = 4), heart failure (n = 2), and hyperlipidemia (n = 2). In addition, 16 studies included a measure of multimorbidity. Overall, there was a higher prevalence of cognitive complaints in individuals with higher multimorbidity, including a potential dose-dependent relationship. Findings for specific conditions were inconsistent, but there is evidence to suggest that cross-sectionally, older adults with diabetes, heart disease, chronic lung disease, and arthritis have more cognitive complaints than those without these conditions.ConclusionThere is strong evidence demonstrating that cognitive complaints are more common in older adults with higher multimorbidity, but little research examining these associations over time. Improving our understanding of the longitudinal trajectory of cognitive complaints, multimorbidity, and objective cognition in older age is an important area for future research.

Project description:BackgroundMany dementia prediction models have been developed, but only few have been externally validated, which hinders clinical uptake and may pose a risk if models are applied to actual patients regardless. Externally validating an existing prediction model is a difficult task, where we mostly rely on the completeness of model reporting in a published article. In this study, we aim to externally validate existing dementia prediction models. To that end, we define model reporting criteria, review published studies, and externally validate three well reported models using routinely collected health data from administrative claims and electronic health records.MethodsWe identified dementia prediction models that were developed between 2011 and 2020 and assessed if they could be externally validated given a set of model criteria. In addition, we externally validated three of these models (Walters' Dementia Risk Score, Mehta's RxDx-Dementia Risk Index, and Nori's ADRD dementia prediction model) on a network of six observational health databases from the United States, United Kingdom, Germany and the Netherlands, including the original development databases of the models.ResultsWe reviewed 59 dementia prediction models. All models reported the prediction method, development database, and target and outcome definitions. Less frequently reported by these 59 prediction models were predictor definitions (52 models) including the time window in which a predictor is assessed (21 models), predictor coefficients (20 models), and the time-at-risk (42 models). The validation of the model by Walters (development c-statistic: 0.84) showed moderate transportability (0.67-0.76 c-statistic). The Mehta model (development c-statistic: 0.81) transported well to some of the external databases (0.69-0.79 c-statistic). The Nori model (development AUROC: 0.69) transported well (0.62-0.68 AUROC) but performed modestly overall. Recalibration showed improvements for the Walters and Nori models, while recalibration could not be assessed for the Mehta model due to unreported baseline hazard.ConclusionWe observed that reporting is mostly insufficient to fully externally validate published dementia prediction models, and therefore, it is uncertain how well these models would work in other clinical settings. We emphasize the importance of following established guidelines for reporting clinical prediction models. We recommend that reporting should be more explicit and have external validation in mind if the model is meant to be applied in different settings.

Project description:BackgroundStudies investigating the risk factors for or causation of dementia must consider subjects prior to disease onset. To overcome the limitations of prospective studies and self-reported recall of information, the use of existing data is key. This review provides a narrative account of dementia ascertainment methods using sources of existing data.MethodsThe literature search was performed using: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo and Web of Science. Included articles reported a UK-based study of dementia in which cases were ascertained using existing data. Existing data included that which was routinely collected and that which was collected for previous research. After removing duplicates, abstracts were screened and the remaining articles were included for full-text review. A quality tool was used to evaluate the description of the ascertainment methodology.ResultsOf the 3545 abstracts screened, 360 articles were selected for full-text review. 47 articles were included for final consideration. Data sources for ascertainment included: death records, national datasets, research databases and hospital records among others. 36 articles used existing data alone for ascertainment, of which 27 used only a single data source. The most frequently used source was a research database. Quality scores ranged from 7/16 to 16/16. Quality scores were better for articles with dementia ascertainment as an outcome. Some papers performed validation studies of dementia ascertainment and most indicated that observed rates of dementia were lower than expected.ConclusionsWe identified a lack of consistency in dementia ascertainment methodology using existing data. With no data source identified as a "gold-standard", we suggest the use of multiple sources. Where possible, studies should access records with evidence to confirm the diagnosis. Studies should also calculate the dementia ascertainment rate for the population being studied to enable a comparison with an expected rate.

Dataset Information

Validation of CKD and related conditions in existing data sets: A systematic review.

Publications

Validation of CKD and related conditions in existing data sets: A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets