Dataset Information

Tucuxi-BLAST: Enabling fast and accurate record linkage of large-scale health-related administrative databases through a DNA-encoded approach

ABSTRACT:

Background

Public health research frequently requires the integration of information from different data sources. However, errors in the records and the high computational costs involved make linking large administrative databases using record linkage (RL) methodologies a major challenge.

Methods

We present Tucuxi-BLAST, a versatile tool for probabilistic RL that utilizes a DNA-encoded approach to encrypt, analyze and link massive administrative databases. Tucuxi-BLAST encodes the identification records into DNA. BLASTn algorithm is then used to align the sequences between databases. We tested and benchmarked on a simulated database containing records for 300 million individuals and also on four large administrative databases containing real data on Brazilian patients.

Results

Our method was able to overcome misspellings and typographical errors in administrative databases. In processing the RL of the largest simulated dataset (200k records), the state-of-the-art method took 5 days and 7 h to perform the RL, while Tucuxi-BLAST only took 23 h. When compared with five existing RL tools applied to a gold-standard dataset from real health-related databases, Tucuxi-BLAST had the highest accuracy and speed. By repurposing genomic tools, Tucuxi-BLAST can improve data-driven medical research and provide a fast and accurate way to link individual information across several administrative databases.

SUBMITTER: Araujo J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9281601 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundHistorically, counting influenza recorded in administrative health outcome databases has been considered insufficient to estimate influenza attributable morbidity and mortality in populations. We used database record linkage to evaluate whether modern databases have similar limitations.MethodsPerson-level records were linked across databases of laboratory notified influenza, emergency department (ED) presentations, hospital admissions and death registrations, from the population (∼6.9 million) of New South Wales (NSW), Australia, 2005 to 2008.ResultsThere were 2568 virologically diagnosed influenza infections notified. Among those, 25% of 40 who died, 49% of 1451 with a hospital admission and 7% of 1742 with an ED presentation had influenza recorded on the respective database record. Compared with persons aged ≥65 years and residents of regional and remote areas, respectively, children and residents of major cities were more likely to have influenza coded on their admission record. Compared with older persons and admitted patients, respectively, working age persons and non-admitted persons were more likely to have influenza coded on their ED record. On both ED and admission records, persons with influenza type A infection were more likely than those with type B infection to have influenza coded. Among death registrations, hospital admissions and ED presentations with influenza recorded as a cause of illness, 15%, 28% and 1.4%, respectively, also had laboratory notified influenza. Time trends in counts of influenza recorded on the ED, admission and death databases reflected the trend in counts of virologically diagnosed influenza.ConclusionsA minority of the death, hospital admission and ED records for persons with a virologically diagnosed influenza infection identified influenza as a cause of illness. Few database records with influenza recorded as a cause had laboratory confirmation. The databases have limited value for estimating incidence of influenza outcomes, but can be used for monitoring variation in incidence over time.

Project description:ObjectiveThese analyses aim to comparatively evaluate the persistence on treatment of different biological disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) when administered in monotherapy compared with combination with conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (csDMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients receiving first-line biologics.DesignThis is a retrospective observational study on Administrative Healthcare Databases.MethodsData were extracted from healthcare databases of the Lombardy Region, Italy (2004-2013), as a part of the RECord-linkage On Rheumatic Diseases study, on behalf of the Italian Society for Rheumatology. Analyses included patients with RA starting first-line approved course of bDMARDs and evaluated drug survival by using Cox proportional hazard models. Results are presented as HRs and 95% CI, crude and adjusted for prespecified confounders (age, sex, disease duration, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), previous infections, use of concomitant glucocorticoids or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)).Results4478 patients with RA were included (17.84% monotherapy). Etanercept, adalimumab and infliximab were the most prescribed first-line biologics. bDMARD monotherapy was associated with longer disease duration, higher CCI, lower glucocorticoids and NSAIDs use. Compared with monotherapy, combination associated with a lower risk of failure (adjusted HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.88). Among monotherapies, considering etanercept as reference, adalimumab (1.28, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.59) and infliximab (2.41, 95% CI 1.85 to 3.15) had higher risk of failure. Concomitant methotrexate (0.78, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.87), leflunomide (0.80, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.98) or csDMARD combinations (0.77, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.87) reduced the risk of bDMARD withdrawal.ConclusionAdalimumab and infliximab monotherapies show lower retention rate compared with etanercept. The relatively small number of therapeutic courses different from tumour necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors makes more difficult to achieve conclusive results with other biologics. Concomitant methotrexate, leflunomide and csDMARDs combination associate with longer survival on bDMARD. Our data confirm the effectiveness of the current practices in the choice of etanercept as first-line anti-TNF monotherapy and strengthen the currently recommended use of bDMARDs in combination with csDMARDs.