Multiple sclerosis and related disorders · 2018
Identifying optic neuritis and transverse myelitis using administrative data.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Marrie Ruth Ann, Ekuma Okechukwu, Wijnands José M A, Kingwell Elaine, Zhu Feng, Zhao Yinshan, Fisk John D, Evans Charity, Tremlett Helen
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: We aimed to validate administrative case definitions to identify individuals with optic neuritis (ON) or transverse myelitis (TM), and to distinguish which of these individuals had a monophasic presentation versus multiple sclerosis (MS).
METHODS: Using population-based administrative (health claims) data from Manitoba, Canada, we developed case definitions for ON and TM, and distinguished individuals who had monophasic presentations (ON-nonMS, TM-nonMS) versus those later diagnosed with MS (ON-MS, TM-MS). We compared performance of these case definitions to diagnoses based on medical records review in a reference cohort (n = 1251) using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. We estimated the annual incidence of these conditions for a three-year period (2011-2013).
RESULTS: When compared to medical records, using ≥1 physician visit, the case definition for ON had good sensitivity (88.5%), and specificity (82.7%) whereas the case definition for TM had low sensitivity (25.9%) and higher specificity (89.0%). Findings for the other case definitions tested were: ON-MS (sensitivity: 84.1%, specificity: 83.9%), ON-nonMS (sensitivity: 66.7%, specificity 98.5%), TM-MS (sensitivity: 22.2%, specificity: 90.4%), and TM-nonMS (sensitivity: 3.7%, specificity: 99.7%). After applying the ON and TM case definitions to administrative data, the average annual incidence of ON over the period 2011-2013 was 75.9 per 100,000 person-years (95%CI: 72.8, 79.1) and of TM was 18.3 per 100,000 person-years (95%CI: 16.8, 19.8).
CONCLUSION: Administrative data can be used to identify individuals with incident ON and TM, and to distinguish those with monophasic syndromes from those with an incident presentation of MS.
METHODS: Using population-based administrative (health claims) data from Manitoba, Canada, we developed case definitions for ON and TM, and distinguished individuals who had monophasic presentations (ON-nonMS, TM-nonMS) versus those later diagnosed with MS (ON-MS, TM-MS). We compared performance of these case definitions to diagnoses based on medical records review in a reference cohort (n = 1251) using sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. We estimated the annual incidence of these conditions for a three-year period (2011-2013).
RESULTS: When compared to medical records, using ≥1 physician visit, the case definition for ON had good sensitivity (88.5%), and specificity (82.7%) whereas the case definition for TM had low sensitivity (25.9%) and higher specificity (89.0%). Findings for the other case definitions tested were: ON-MS (sensitivity: 84.1%, specificity: 83.9%), ON-nonMS (sensitivity: 66.7%, specificity 98.5%), TM-MS (sensitivity: 22.2%, specificity: 90.4%), and TM-nonMS (sensitivity: 3.7%, specificity: 99.7%). After applying the ON and TM case definitions to administrative data, the average annual incidence of ON over the period 2011-2013 was 75.9 per 100,000 person-years (95%CI: 72.8, 79.1) and of TM was 18.3 per 100,000 person-years (95%CI: 16.8, 19.8).
CONCLUSION: Administrative data can be used to identify individuals with incident ON and TM, and to distinguish those with monophasic syndromes from those with an incident presentation of MS.