Dataset Information

Reproducibility, reliability and validity of population-based administrative health data for the assessment of cancer non-related comorbidities.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients with comorbidities do not receive optimal treatment for their cancer, leading to lower cancer survival. Information on individual comorbidities is not straightforward to derive from population-based administrative health datasets. We described the development of a reproducible algorithm to extract the individual Charlson index comorbidities from such data. We illustrated the algorithm with 1,789 laryngeal cancer patients diagnosed in England in 2013. We aimed to clearly set out and advocate the time-related assumptions specified in the algorithm by providing empirical evidence for them.

Methods

Comorbidities were assessed from hospital records in the ten years preceding cancer diagnosis and internal reliability of the hospital records was checked. Data were right-truncated 6 or 12 months prior to cancer diagnosis to avoid inclusion of potentially cancer-related comorbidities. We tested for collider bias using Cox regression.

Results

Our administrative data showed weak to moderate internal reliability to identify comorbidities (ICC ranging between 0.1 and 0.6) but a notably high external validity (86.3%). We showed a reverse protective effect of non-cancer related Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) when the effect is split into cancer and non-cancer related COPD (Age-adjusted HR: 0.95, 95% CI:0.7-1.28 for non-cancer related comorbidities). Furthermore, we showed that a window of 6 years before diagnosis is an optimal period for the assessment of comorbidities.

Conclusion

To formulate a robust approach for assessing common comorbidities, it is important that assumptions made are explicitly stated and empirically proven. We provide a transparent and consistent approach useful to researchers looking to assess comorbidities for cancer patients using administrative health data.

SUBMITTER: Maringe C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5338773 | biostudies-literature | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Reproducibility, reliability and validity of population-based administrative health data for the assessment of cancer non-related comorbidities.

Maringe Camille C Fowler Helen H Rachet Bernard B Luque-Fernandez Miguel Angel MA

PloS one 20170306 3

<h4>Background</h4>Patients with comorbidities do not receive optimal treatment for their cancer, leading to lower cancer survival. Information on individual comorbidities is not straightforward to derive from population-based administrative health datasets. We described the development of a reproducible algorithm to extract the individual Charlson index comorbidities from such data. We illustrated the algorithm with 1,789 laryngeal cancer patients diagnosed in England in 2013. We aimed to clear ...[more]

PMID: 28263996

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundEmotional clarity has often been assessed with self-report measures, but efforts have also been made to measure it passively, which has advantages such as avoiding potential inaccuracy in responses stemming from social desirability bias or poor insight into emotional clarity. Response times (RTs) to emotion items administered in ecological momentary assessments (EMAs) may be an indirect indicator of emotional clarity. Another proposed indicator is the drift rate parameter, which assumes that, aside from how fast a person responds to emotion items, the measurement of emotional clarity also requires the consideration of how careful participants were in providing responses.ObjectiveThis paper aims to examine the reliability and validity of RTs and drift rate parameters from EMA emotion items as indicators of individual differences in emotional clarity.MethodsSecondary data analysis was conducted on data from 196 adults with type 1 diabetes who completed a 2-week EMA study involving the completion of 5 to 6 surveys daily. If lower RTs and higher drift rates (from EMA emotion items) were indicators of emotional clarity, we hypothesized that greater levels (ie, higher clarity) should be associated with greater life satisfaction; lower levels of neuroticism, depression, anxiety, and diabetes distress; and fewer difficulties with emotion regulation. Because prior literature suggested emotional clarity could be valence specific, EMA items for negative affect (NA) and positive affect were examined separately.ResultsReliability of the proposed indicators of emotional clarity was acceptable with a small number of EMA prompts (ie, 4 to 7 prompts in total or 1 to 2 days of EMA surveys). Consistent with expectations, the average drift rate of NA items across multiple EMAs had expected associations with other measures, such as correlations of r=-0.27 (P<.001) with depression symptoms, r=-0.27 (P=.001) with anxiety symptoms, r=-0.15 (P=.03) with emotion regulation difficulties, and r=0.63 (P<.001) with RTs to NA items. People with a higher NA drift rate responded faster to NA emotion items, had greater subjective well-being (eg, fewer depression symptoms), and had fewer difficulties with overall emotion regulation, which are all aligned with the expectation for an emotional clarity measure. Contrary to expectations, the validities of average RTs to NA items, the drift rate of positive affect items, and RTs to positive affect items were not strongly supported by our results.ConclusionsStudy findings provided initial support for the validity of NA drift rate as an indicator of emotional clarity but not for that of other RT-based clarity measures. Evidence was preliminary because the sample size was not sufficient to detect small but potentially meaningful correlations, as the sample size of the diabetes EMA study was chosen for other more primary research questions. Further research on passive emotional clarity measures is needed.

Project description:BackgroundAccurate coding of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection in administrative data benefits population-based studies about the epidemiology, treatment and outcomes of COVID-19. We describe the validity of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded in hospital discharge abstracts, emergency department records and outpatient physician service claims from 3 Canadian provinces.MethodsIn this cohort study, population-based inpatient, emergency department and outpatient records were linked to SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR; reference standard) test results from British Columbia, Manitoba and Ontario for Apr. 1, 2020, to Mar. 31, 2021. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection were estimated for each quarter in the study period, overall and by province, age group and sex.ResultsOur study encompassed more than 13 million SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results. Specificity and NPV of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection were consistently high (i.e., most estimates were > 95%). Overall sensitivity estimates were 86.2%, 60.4% and 20.3% in the first quarter for inpatient, emergency department and outpatient cohorts, and 66.2%, 47.5% and 25.0% in the last quarter, respectively. For inpatients, overall PPV estimates ranged from 50.0% to 66.4%. For emergency department patients, overall PPV estimates were 76.9% and 68.3% in the first and last quarters, respectively. For outpatients, PPV estimates were 6.8% and 29.1% in the first and last quarters, respectively.InterpretationWe found variations in the validity of diagnoses for SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded in different health care settings, geographic areas and over time. Our multiprovince validation study provides evidence about the potential use of inpatient and emergency department records as an alternative to population-based laboratory data for identification of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, but does not support the use of outpatient claims for this purpose.

Dataset Information

Reproducibility, reliability and validity of population-based administrative health data for the assessment of cancer non-related comorbidities.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Reproducibility, reliability and validity of population-based administrative health data for the assessment of cancer non-related comorbidities.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets