Data sources for measuring comorbidity: A comparison of hospital records and medicare claims for cancer patients

Medical Care

Volumn 44, Issue 10, 2006, Pages 921-928

  Klabunde, Carrie N ^a   Harlan, Linda C ^a   Warren, Joan L ^a  

^a NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cancer; Claims data; Comorbidity; Health services research; Medical record; Medicare; SEER

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER REGISTRY; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMORBIDITY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; INSURANCE; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; MEDICARE; NEOPLASM; STATISTICS;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; COHORT STUDIES; COMORBIDITY; FEMALE; HOSPITALS; HUMANS; INSURANCE CLAIM REVIEW; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; MEDICARE; NEOPLASMS; SEER PROGRAM;

EID: 33748987888     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.mlr.0000223480.52713.b9     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Feinstein AR. The pre-therapeutic classification of co-morbidity in chronic disease. J Chron Dis. 1970;23:455-468.
2. Van den Akker M, Buntinx F, Metsemakers JFM, et al. Multimorbidity in general practice: prevalence, incidence, and determinants of cooccurring chronic and recurrent disease. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51:367-375.
3. Klabunde CN, Warren JL, Legier JM. Assessment of comorbidity using claims data: an overview. Medical Care. 2002;40(Suppl):26-35.
4. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chron Dis. 1987;40:373-383.
5. Malenka DJ, McLerran D, Roos N, et al. Using administrative data to describe casemix: a comparison with the medical record. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47:1027-1032.
6. Humphries KH, Rankin JM, Carere RG, et al. Co-morbidity data in outcomes research. Are clinical data derived from administrative databases a reliable alternative to chart review? J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:343-349.
7. van Doom C, Bogardus ST, Williams CS, et al. Risk adjustment for older hospitalized persons: a comparison of two methods of data collection for the Charlson index. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:694-701.
8. Quam L, Ellis LBM, Venus P, et al. Using claims data for epidemiologic research. The concordance of claims-based criteria with the medical record and patient survey for identifying a hypertensive population. Med Care. 1993;31:498-507.
9. Romano PS, Roos LL, Luft HS, et al. A comparison of administrative versus clinical data: coronary artery bypass surgery as an example. J Clin Epidemiol. 1994;47:249-260.
10. Hawker GA, Coyte PC, Wright JG, et al. Accuracy of administrative data for assessing outcomes alter knee replacement surgery. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:265-273.
11. National Cancer Institute. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program. Available at: http://SEER.cancer.gov. Accessed on April 20, 2006.
12. Klabunde CN, Potosky AL, Legier JM, et al. Development of a comorbidity index using physician claims data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53:1258-1267.
13. Piccirillo JF, Costas I, Grove L. A critical appraisal of the use of ICD-9-CM codes to classify comorbidity and complications. J Registry Manage. 2003;30:117-122.
14. American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer. Facility Oncology Registry Data Standards: Revised for 2004. Available at http://www.facs.org/ cancer/coc/fordsmanual.html. Accessed on April 20, 2006.
15. National Cancer Institute. Patterns of Care/Quality of Care Studies. Available at: http://healthservices.cancer.gov/surveys/poc/. Accessed on April 20, 2006.
16. National Cancer Institute. SEER-Medicare Linked Database. Available at: http://healthservices.cancer.gov/seemiedicare/. Accessed on April 20, 2006.
17. National Cancer Institute. SEER-Medicare: Calculation of Comorbidity Weights. Available at: http://healthservices.cancer.gov/seermedicare/program/ comorbidity.html. Accessed on April 20, 2006.
18. Klabunde CN, Reeve B, Harlan LC, et al. Do patients consistently report comorbid conditions over time? Results from the Prostate Cancer Outcomes Study. Med Care. 2005;43:391-400.
19. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159-174.
20. Iezzoni LI, Foley SM, Daley J, et al. Comorbidities, complications, and coding bias. Does the number of diagnosis codes matter in predicting in-hospital mortality? JAMA. 1992;267:2197-2203.
21. Hsia DC, Krushat WM, Fagan AB, et al. Accuracy of diagnostic coding for Medicare patients under the prospective-payment system. N Engl J Med. 1988;318:352-355.
22. Bernstein AB, Hing E, Burt CW, et al. Trend data on medical encounters: tracking a moving target. Health Aff. 2001;20:58-72.
23. Wilchesky M, Tampblyn RM, Huang A. Validation of diagnostic codes within medical services claims. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:131-141.
24. Newschaffer CJ, Bush TL, Penberthy LT. Comorbidity measurement in elderly female breast cancer patients with administrative and medical records data. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:725-733.
25. National Diabetes Surveillance System. Prevalence of diabetes. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/statistics/prev/national/figbyage.htm. Accessed on April 20, 2006.
26. Hajjar I, Kotchen TA. Trends in prevalence, awareness, treatment, and control of hypertension in the United States, 1988-2000. JAMA. 2003;290:199-206.
27. Mohangoo AD, van der Linden MW, Schellevis FG, et al. Prevalence estimates of asthma or COPD from a health interview survey and from general practitioner registration: what's the difference? Eur J Public Health 2006;16:101-105.
28. Wilson SE, Howell BL. Do panel surveys make people sick? US arthritis trends m the Health and Retirement Study. Soc Sci Med. 2005;602623-2627.
29. Beckett M, Weinstein M, Goldman N, et al. Do health interview surveys yield reliable data on chronic illness among older respondents? Am J Epidemiol. 2000;151:315-323.