Importance of accurately identifying chronic disease in studies using electronic health records

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 341, Issue 7770, 2010, Pages 440-443

  Manuel, Douglas G ^a,b,c,d,e   Rosella, Laura C ^d,e,f   Stukel, Thérèse A ^d,f  

^a OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^b STATISTICS CANADA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^d INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL EVALUATIVE SCIENCES   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^f PUBLIC HEALTH ONTARIO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACCURACY; ARTICLE; CHRONIC DISEASE; DISEASE CLASSIFICATION; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGISTER; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; CLASSIFICATION; EPIDEMIOLOGY; MEDICAL RECORD; METHODOLOGY; STANDARD;

BIAS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); CHRONIC DISEASE; HUMANS; MEDICAL RECORDS SYSTEMS, COMPUTERIZED; REGISTRIES; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 77956249946     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c4226     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Newton J, Garnes H. Disease registers in England. Institute of Health Sciences, University of Oxford, 2002.
2. Hurtado M, Swift E, Corrigan J. Envisioning the national health care quality report. National Academy Press, 2001.
3. Powell AE, Davies HT, Thomson RG. Using routine comparative data to assess the quality of health care: understanding and avoiding common pitfalls. Qual Saf Health Care 2003;12:122-8.
4. Joshy G, Simmons D. Diabetes information systems: a rapidly emerging support for diabetes surveillance and care. Diabetes Technol Ther 2006;8:587-97.
5. Herrett E, Thomas SL, Schoonen WM, Smeeth L, Hall AJ. Validation and validity of diagnoses in the General Practice Research Database: a systematic review. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2010;69:4-14.
6. General Practice Research Database. www.gprd.com.
7. Woodward G, van Walraven C, Hux JE. Utilization and outcomes of HbA1c testing: a population-based study. CMAJ 2006;174:327-9.
8. Lipscombe LL, Hux JE. Trends in diabetes prevalence, incidence, and mortality in Ontario, Canada 1995-2005: a population-based study. Lancet 2007;369:750-6.
9. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, Gatsonis CA, Glasziou PP, Irwig LM, et al. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2003;138:w1-12.
10. Hux JE, Ivis F, Flintoft V, Bica A. Diabetes in Ontario: determination of prevalence and incidence using a validated administrative data algorithm. Diabetes Care 2002;25:512-6. (Pubitemid 41103345)
11. Kelsey J, Thompson W, Evans A. Methods in observational epidemiology. 2nd ed. Oxford University Press, 1996.
12. Rogan WJ, Gladen B. Estimating prevalence from the results of a screening test. Am J Epidemiol 1978;107:71-6.
13. Couris CM, Polazzi S, Olive F, Remontet L, Bossard N, Gomez F, et al. Breast cancer incidence using administrative data: correction with sensitivity and specificity. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;62:660-6.
14. Lix L, Yogendran M, Burchill C, Metge C, McKeen N, Moore D, et al. Defining and validating chronic diseases: an administrative data approach. Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, 2006.
15. Mullooly JP. Misclassification model for person-time analysis of automated medical care databases. Am J Epidemiol 1996;144:782-92.
16. White E. The effect of misclassification of disease status in follow-up-studies - implications for selecting disease classification criteria. Am J Epidemiol 1986;124:816-25. (Pubitemid 17180496)
17. Health Council of Canada. Why health care renewal matters: lessons from diabetes. 2007. www.healthcouncilcanada.ca/docs/rpts/2007/HCC-DiabetesRpt.pdf.
18. Wild S, Roglic G, Green A, Sicree R, King H. Global prevalence of diabetes: estimates for the year 2000 and projections for 2030. Diabetes Care 2004;27:1047-53.
19. Ontario Ministry of Health and Longterm Care. Diabetes strategy - backgrounder. Ontario Ministry of Health and Longterm Care, 2008.
20. World Health Organization. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems: 10th revision. WHO, 1992.
21. Schulz EB, Barrett JW, Price C. Read code quality assurance. J Am Med Inform Assoc 1998;5:337-46.
22. Habbema JDF, Eijkemans R, Krijnen P, Knottnerus JA. Analysis of data on the accuracy of diagnostic tests. In: Knottnerus JA, ed. The evidence base of clinical diagnosis. BMJ Publishing, 2002:117-44.
23. Lix LM, Yogendran MS, Leslie WD, Shaw SY, Baumgartner R, Bowman C, et al. Using multiple data features improved the validity of osteoporosis case ascertainment from administrative databases. J Clin Epidemiol 2008;61:1250-60.
24. Sturmer T, Thurigen D, Spiegelman D, Blettner M, Brenner H. The performance of methods for correcting measurement error in case-control studies. Epidemiology 2002;13:507-16.
25. Mower WR. Evaluating bias and variability in diagnostic test reports. Ann Emerg Med 1999;33:85-91.
26. Tu JV, Khalid L, Donovan LR, Ko DT. Indicators of quality of care for patients with acute myocardial infarction. CMAJ 2008;179:909-15.
27. Juurlink DN, Mamdani MM, Lee DS, Kopp A, Austin PC, Laupacis A, et al. Rates of hyperkalemia after publication of the Randomized Aldactone Evaluation Study. N Engl J Med 2004;351:543-51.
28. Van Walraven C, Austin PC, Manuel D, Knoll G, Jennings A, Forster AJ. The usefulness of administrative databases for identifying disease cohorts is increased with a multivariate model. J Clin Epidemiol 2010;63:1000-10.