MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.jeph.2026.203788

Медицинская библиотека · Journal of epidemiology and population health · 2026

Algorithms for the identification of ophthalmic diseases in medico-administrative databases: A systematic review.

Neau Julie, Turpin Agathe, Rajendrabose Deivanes, Haneef Romana, Soltani Omayma, Dilange Lisa, Couasnard Alexis, Bodaghi Bahram, Baudouin Christophe, Tubach Florence, Guillo Sylvie, Dechartres Agnès

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

CONTEXT: Medico-administrative databases (MADs) are increasingly used in comparative effectiveness research.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of algorithms used for the identification of key ophthalmic diseases in MADs: age-related macular degeneration (AMD), diabetic retinopathy (DR)/ diabetic macular edema (DME), glaucoma, cataract and uveitis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed between June 30, 2016, and August 6, 2024, using keywords related to MADs and the ophthalmic diseases of interest. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data.

RESULTS

From the 1719 references identified, 315 were selected describing a total of 523 algorithms. Approximately half of the study objectives were related to the identification of factors associated with the onset of ophthalmic diseases, exacerbation, or hospitalization (48%, n = 151). Only 2% (n = 6) focused exclusively on the development and/or validation of algorithms. Most studies were from Taiwan (36%, n = 113), Korea (27%, n = 84) and the United States (20%, n = 64). From the 523 algorithms, a validation was mentioned for 47 (9%). After regrouping close algorithms, 433 different algorithms were identified concerning glaucoma (34%, n = 146), DR/DME (26%, n = 114), AMD (18%, n = 80), cataract (11%, n = 47) and uveitis (11%, n = 46). About half of these algorithms used diagnosis codes only (58%, n = 251), while others combined diagnosis codes and procedures (16%, n = 69), or diagnosis codes and drugs (12%, n = 50).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review showed heterogeneity between algorithms used to identify the same pathology, raising the question of which ones are more appropriate to use in a particular context. Moreover, most algorithms were not validated despite the potential impact on study results.

Для цитирования: Neau Julie, Turpin Agathe, Rajendrabose Deivanes, Haneef Romana, Soltani Omayma, Dilange Lisa, Couasnard Alexis, Bodaghi Bahram, Baudouin Christophe, Tubach Florence, Guillo Sylvie, Dechartres Agnès. Algorithms for the identification of ophthalmic diseases in medico-administrative databases: A systematic review.. Journal of epidemiology and population health. 2026. DOI: 10.1016/j.jeph.2026.203788.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.