Dataset Information

Validity of International Classification of Diseases Codes for Identifying Neuro-Ophthalmic Disease in Large Data Sets: A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Administrative health claims data have been used for research in neuro-ophthalmology, but the validity of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes for identifying neuro-ophthalmic conditions is unclear.

Evidence acquisition

We performed a systematic literature review to assess the validity of administrative claims data for identifying patients with neuro-ophthalmic disorders. Two reviewers independently reviewed all eligible full-length articles and used a standardized abstraction form to identify ICD code-based definitions for 9 neuro-ophthalmic conditions and their sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). A quality assessment of eligible studies was also performed.

Results

Eleven articles that met criteria for inclusion are as follows: 3 studies of idiopathic intracranial hypertension (PPV 54%-91% and NPV 74%-85%), 2 studies of giant cell arteritis (sensitivity 30%-96% and PPV 94%), 3 studies of optic neuritis (sensitivity 76%-99%, specificity 83%-100%, PPV 25%-100%, and NPV 98%-100%), 1 study of neuromyelitis optica (sensitivity 60%, specificity 100%, PPV 43%-100%, and NPV 98%-100%), 1 study of ocular motor cranial neuropathies (PPV 98%-99%), and 2 studies of myasthenia gravis (sensitivity 53%-97%, specificity 99%-100%, PPV 5%-90%, and NPV 100%). No studies met eligibility criteria for nonarteritic ischemic optic neuropathy, thyroid eye disease, and blepharospasm. Approximately 45.5% provided only one measure of diagnostic accuracy. Complete information about the validation cohorts, inclusion/exclusion criteria, data collection methods, and expertise of those reviewing charts for diagnostic accuracy was missing in 90.9%, 72.7%, 81.8%, and 36.4% of studies, respectively.

Conclusions

Few studies have reported the validity of ICD codes for neuro-ophthalmic conditions. The range of diagnostic accuracy for some disorders and study quality varied widely. This should be taken into consideration when interpreting studies of neuro-ophthalmic conditions using administrative claims data.

SUBMITTER: Hamedani AG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7678809 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:To examine the validity of the International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10) codes for hyponatraemia in the nationwide population-based Danish National Registry of Patients (DNRP) among inpatients of all ages.Population-based validation study.All somatic hospitals in the North and Central Denmark Regions from 2006 through 2011.Patients of all ages admitted to hospital (n=819 701 individual patients) during the study period. The patient could be included in the study more than once, and our study did not restrict to patients with serum sodium measurements (total of n=2 186 642 hospitalisations).We validated ICD-10 discharge diagnoses of hyponatraemia recorded in the DNRP, using serum sodium measurements obtained from the laboratory information systems (LABKA) research database as the gold standard. One sodium value <135 mmol/L measured at any time during hospitalisation confirmed the diagnosis. We estimated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for ICD-10 codes for hyponatraemia overall and for cut-off points for increasing hyponatraemia severity.An ICD-10 code for hyponatraemia was recorded in the DNRP in 5850 of the 2 186 642 hospitalisations identified. According to laboratory measurements, however, hyponatraemia was present in 306 418 (14%) hospitalisations. Sensitivity of hyponatraemia diagnoses was 1.8% (95% CI 1.7% to 1.8%). For sodium values <115 mmol/L, sensitivity was 34.3% (95% CI 32.6% to 35.9%). The overall PPV was 92.5% (95% CI 91.8% to 93.1%) and decreased with increasing hyponatraemia severity. Specificity and NPV were high for all cut-off points (?99.8% and ?86.2%, respectively). Patients with hyponatraemia without a corresponding ICD-10 discharge diagnosis were younger and had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index scores than patients with hyponatraemia with a hyponatraemia code in the DNRP.ICD-10 codes for hyponatraemia in the DNRP have high specificity but very low sensitivity. Laboratory test results, not discharge diagnoses, should be used to ascertain hyponatraemia.

Project description:Administrative databases are increasingly used in research studies to capture clinical outcomes such as sepsis. This systematic review and meta-analysis examines the accuracy of International Classification of Diseases, 10th revision (ICD-10), codes for identifying sepsis in adult and pediatric patients.Data sourcesWe searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CENTRAL, Epistemonikos, and McMaster Superfilters from inception to September 7, 2021.Study selectionWe included studies that validated the accuracy of sepsis ICD-10 codes against any reference standard.Data extractionThree authors, working in duplicate, independently extracted data. We conducted meta-analysis using a random effects model to pool sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). We evaluated individual study risk of bias using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies tool and assessed certainty in pooled diagnostic effect measures using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation framework.Data synthesisThirteen eligible studies were included in the qualitative synthesis and the meta-analysis. Eleven studies used manual chart review as the reference standard, and four studies used registry databases. Only one study evaluated pediatric patients exclusively. Compared with the reference standard of detailed chart review and/or registry databases, the pooled sensitivity for sepsis ICD-10 codes was 35% (95% CI, 22-48, low certainty), whereas the pooled specificity was 98% (95% CI: 98-99, low certainty). The PPV for ICD-10 codes ranged from 9.8% to 100% (median, 72.0%; interquartile range [IQR], 50.0-84.7%). NPV ranged from 54.7% to 99.1% (median, 95.9%; interquartile range, 85.5-98.3%).ConclusionsSepsis is undercoded in administrative databases. Future research is needed to explore if greater consistency in ICD-10 code definitions and enhanced quality measures for ICD-10 coders can improve the coding accuracy of sepsis in large databases.

Project description:PurposeTo develop and validate a tool aiming to support ophthalmologists in identifying, during routine ophthalmologic visits, patients at higher risk of falling in the following year.MethodsA group of 141 subjects (age: 73.2 ± 11.4 years), recruited at our Eye Clinic, underwent a baseline ophthalmic examination and a standardized questionnaire, including lifestyles, general health, social engagement and eyesight problems. Moreover, visual disability was assessed by the Activity of Daily Vision Scale (ADVS). The subjects were followed up for 12 months in order to record prospective falls. A subject who reported at least one fall within one year from the baseline assessment was considered as faller, otherwise as non-faller. Different tree-based algorithms (i.e., C4.5, AdaBoost and Random Forests) were used to develop automatic classifiers and their performances were evaluated by the cross-validation approach.ResultsOver the follow-up, 25 falls were referred by 13 patients. The logistic regression analysis showed the following variables as significant predictors of prospective falls: pseudophakia and use of prescribed eyeglasses as protective factors, recent worsening of visual acuity as risk factor. Random Forest ranked best corrected visual acuity, number of sleeping hours and job type as the most important features. Finally, AdaBoost enabled the identification of subjects at higher risk of falling in the following 12 months with a sensitivity rate of 69.2% and a specificity rate of 76.6%.ConclusionsThe current study proposes a novel method, based on classification trees applied to self-reported factors and health information assessed by a standardized questionnaire during ophthalmological visits, to identify ophthalmic patients at higher risk of falling in the following 12 months. The findings of the current study pave the way to the validation of the proposed novel tool for fall risk screening on a larger cohort of patients with visual impairment referred to eye clinics.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Stillbirths and neonatal deaths have long been imperfectly classified and recorded worldwide. In Hong Kong, the current code system is deficient (>90% cases with unknown causes) in providing the diagnoses of perinatal mortality cases. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to apply the International Classification of Diseases for Perinatal Mortality (ICD-PM) system to existing perinatal death data. Further, the aim was to assess whether there was any change in the classifications of perinatal deaths compared with the existing classification system and identify any areas in which future interventions can be made. METHODS:We applied the ICD-PM (with International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision) code system to existing perinatal death data in Kwong Wah Hospital, Hong Kong, to improve diagnostic classification. The study included stillbirths (after 24 weeks gestation) and neonatal deaths (from birth to 28 days). The retrospective data (5 years) from May 1, 2012, to April 30, 2017, were recoded by the principal investigator (HML) applying the ICD-PM, then validated by an overseas expert (EA) after she reviewed the detailed case summaries. The prospective application of ICD-PM from May 1, 2017, to April 30, 2019, was performed during the monthly multidisciplinary perinatal meetings and then also validated by EA for agreement. RESULTS:We analyzed the data of 34,920 deliveries, and 119 cases were included for analysis (92 stillbirths and 27 neonatal deaths). The overall agreement with EA of our codes using the ICD-PM was 93.2% (111/119); 92% (78/85) for the 5 years of retrospective codes and 97% (33/34) for the 2 years of prospective codes (P=.44). After the application of the ICD-PM, the overall proportion of unknown causes of perinatal mortality dropped from 34.5% (41/119) to 10.1% (12/119) of cases (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS:Using the ICD-PM would lead to a better classification of perinatal deaths, reduce the proportion of unknown diagnoses, and clearly link the maternal conditions with these perinatal deaths.