Dataset Information

Identifying dementia cases with routinely collected health data: A systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Prospective, population-based studies can be rich resources for dementia research. Follow-up in many such studies is through linkage to routinely collected, coded health-care data sets. We evaluated the accuracy of these data sets for dementia case identification.

Methods

We systematically reviewed the literature for studies comparing dementia coding in routinely collected data sets to any expert-led reference standard. We recorded study characteristics and two accuracy measures-positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity.

Results

We identified 27 eligible studies with 25 estimating PPV and eight estimating sensitivity. Study settings and methods varied widely. For all-cause dementia, PPVs ranged from 33%-100%, but 16/27 were >75%. Sensitivities ranged from 21% to 86%. PPVs for Alzheimer's disease (range 57%-100%) were generally higher than those for vascular dementia (range 19%-91%).

Discussion

Linkage to routine health-care data can achieve a high PPV and reasonable sensitivity in certain settings. Given the heterogeneity in accuracy estimates, cohorts should ideally conduct their own setting-specific validation.

SUBMITTER: Wilkinson T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6105076 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Identifying dementia cases with routinely collected health data: A systematic review.

Wilkinson Tim T Ly Amanda A Schnier Christian C Rannikmäe Kristiina K Bush Kathryn K Brayne Carol C Quinn Terence J TJ Sudlow Cathie L M CLM

Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association 20180403 8

<h4>Introduction</h4>Prospective, population-based studies can be rich resources for dementia research. Follow-up in many such studies is through linkage to routinely collected, coded health-care data sets. We evaluated the accuracy of these data sets for dementia case identification.<h4>Methods</h4>We systematically reviewed the literature for studies comparing dementia coding in routinely collected data sets to any expert-led reference standard. We recorded study characteristics and two accura ...[more]

PMID: 29621480

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction: Achieving equity in health care remains a challenge for health care systems worldwide and marked inequities in access and quality of care persist. Identifying health care equity indicators is an important first step in integrating the concept of equity into assessments of health care system performance, particularly in emergency care. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of administrative data-derived health care equity indicators and their association with socioeconomic determinants of health (SEDH) in emergency care settings. Following PRISMA-Equity reporting guidelines, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science were searched for relevant studies. The outcomes of interest were indicators of health care equity and the associated SEDH they examine. Results: Among 29 studies identified, 14 equity indicators were identified and grouped into four categories that reflect the patient emergency care pathway. Total emergency department (ED) visits and ambulatory care-sensitive condition-related ED visits were the two most frequently used equity indicators. The studies analyzed equity based on seven SEDH: social deprivation, income, education level, social class, insurance coverage, health literacy, and financial and nonfinancial barriers. Despite some conflicting results, all identified SEDH are associated with inequalities in access to and use of emergency care. Conclusion: The use of administrative data-derived indicators in combination with identified SEDH could improve the measurement of health care equity in emergency care settings across health care systems worldwide. Using a combination of indicators is likely to lead to a more comprehensive, well-rounded measurement of health care equity than using any one indicator in isolation. Although studies analyzed focused on emergency care settings, it seems possible to extrapolate these indicators to measure equity in other areas of the health care system. Further studies elucidating root causes of health inequities in and outside the health care system are needed.

Project description:PurposeSignal detection is a crucial step in the discovery of post-marketing adverse drug reactions. There is a growing interest in using routinely collected data to complement established spontaneous report analyses. This work aims to systematically review the methods for drug safety signal detection using routinely collected healthcare data and their performance, both in general and for specific types of drugs and outcomes.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review following the PRISMA guidelines, and registered a protocol in PROSPERO. MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library were searched until July 13, 2021.ResultsThe review included 101 articles, among which there were 39 methodological works, 25 performance assessment papers, and 24 observational studies. Methods included adaptations from those used with spontaneous reports, traditional epidemiological designs, methods specific to signal detection with real-world data. More recently, implementations of machine learning have been studied in the literature. Twenty-five studies evaluated method performances, 16 of them using the area under the curve (AUC) for a range of positive and negative controls as their main measure. Despite the likelihood that performance measurement could vary by drug-event pair, only 10 studies reported performance stratified by drugs and outcomes, in a heterogeneous manner. The replicability of the performance assessment results was limited due to lack of transparency in reporting and the lack of a gold standard reference set.ConclusionsA variety of methods have been described in the literature for signal detection with routinely collected data. No method showed superior performance in all papers and across all drugs and outcomes, performance assessment and reporting were heterogeneous. However, there is limited evidence that self-controlled designs, high dimensional propensity scores, and machine learning can achieve higher performances than other methods.

Dataset Information

Identifying dementia cases with routinely collected health data: A systematic review.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Discussion

Publications

Identifying dementia cases with routinely collected health data: A systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets