Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2024
Development of electronic health record based algorithms to identify individuals with diabetic retinopathy.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Breeyear Joseph H, Mitchell Sabrina L, Nealon Cari L, Hellwege Jacklyn N, Charest Brian, Khakharia Anjali, Halladay Christopher W, Yang Janine, Garriga Gustavo A, Wilson Otis D, Basnet Til B, Hung Adriana M, Reaven Peter D, Meigs James B, Rhee Mary K, Sun Yang, Lynch Mary G, Sobrin Lucia, Brantley Milam A, Sun Yan V, Wilson Peter W, Iyengar Sudha K, Peachey Neal S, Phillips Lawrence S, Edwards Todd L, Giri Ayush
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To develop, validate, and implement algorithms to identify diabetic retinopathy (DR) cases and controls from electronic health care records (EHRs).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed and validated electronic health record (EHR)-based algorithms to identify DR cases and individuals with type I or II diabetes without DR (controls) in 3 independent EHR systems: Vanderbilt University Medical Center Synthetic Derivative (VUMC), the VA Northeast Ohio Healthcare System (VANEOHS), and Massachusetts General Brigham (MGB). Cases were required to meet 1 of the following 3 criteria: (1) 2 or more dates with any DR ICD-9/10 code documented in the EHR, (2) at least one affirmative health-factor or EPIC code for DR along with an ICD9/10 code for DR on a different day, or (3) at least one ICD-9/10 code for any DR occurring within 24 hours of an ophthalmology examination. Criteria for controls included affirmative evidence for diabetes as well as an ophthalmology examination.
RESULTS: The algorithms, developed and evaluated in VUMC through manual chart review, resulted in a positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.93 for cases and negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.91 for controls. Implementation of algorithms yielded similar metrics in VANEOHS (PPV = 0.94; NPV = 0.86) and lower in MGB (PPV = 0.84; NPV = 0.76). In comparison, the algorithm for DR implemented in Phenome-wide association study (PheWAS) in VUMC yielded similar PPV (0.92) but substantially reduced NPV (0.48). Implementation of the algorithms to the Million Veteran Program identified over 62 000 DR cases with genetic data including 14 549 African Americans and 6209 Hispanics with DR.
CONCLUSIONS/DISCUSSION: We demonstrate the robustness of the algorithms at 3 separate healthcare centers, with a minimum PPV of 0.84 and substantially improved NPV than existing automated methods. We strongly encourage independent validation and incorporation of features unique to each EHR to enhance algorithm performance for DR cases and controls.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We developed and validated electronic health record (EHR)-based algorithms to identify DR cases and individuals with type I or II diabetes without DR (controls) in 3 independent EHR systems: Vanderbilt University Medical Center Synthetic Derivative (VUMC), the VA Northeast Ohio Healthcare System (VANEOHS), and Massachusetts General Brigham (MGB). Cases were required to meet 1 of the following 3 criteria: (1) 2 or more dates with any DR ICD-9/10 code documented in the EHR, (2) at least one affirmative health-factor or EPIC code for DR along with an ICD9/10 code for DR on a different day, or (3) at least one ICD-9/10 code for any DR occurring within 24 hours of an ophthalmology examination. Criteria for controls included affirmative evidence for diabetes as well as an ophthalmology examination.
RESULTS: The algorithms, developed and evaluated in VUMC through manual chart review, resulted in a positive predictive value (PPV) of 0.93 for cases and negative predictive value (NPV) of 0.91 for controls. Implementation of algorithms yielded similar metrics in VANEOHS (PPV = 0.94; NPV = 0.86) and lower in MGB (PPV = 0.84; NPV = 0.76). In comparison, the algorithm for DR implemented in Phenome-wide association study (PheWAS) in VUMC yielded similar PPV (0.92) but substantially reduced NPV (0.48). Implementation of the algorithms to the Million Veteran Program identified over 62 000 DR cases with genetic data including 14 549 African Americans and 6209 Hispanics with DR.
CONCLUSIONS/DISCUSSION: We demonstrate the robustness of the algorithms at 3 separate healthcare centers, with a minimum PPV of 0.84 and substantially improved NPV than existing automated methods. We strongly encourage independent validation and incorporation of features unique to each EHR to enhance algorithm performance for DR cases and controls.