Validating the 8 CPCSSN case definitions for chronic disease surveillance in a primary care database of electronic health records

Annals of Family Medicine

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2014, Pages 367-372

  Williamson, Tyler ^a   Green, Michael E ^a   Birtwhistle, Richard ^a   Khan, Shahriar ^a   Garies, Stephanie ^b   Wong, Sabrina T ^c   Natarajan, Nandini ^d   Manca, Donna ^e   Drummond, Neil ^e  

^a QUEEN S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA   (Canada)

^d DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Chronic disease; Electronic health records; Primary health care; Sensitivity and specificity; Validation studies

Indexed keywords

AGED; ALGORITHM; CANADA; CHRONIC DISEASE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DEMENTIA; DEPRESSION; DIABETES MELLITUS; ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORD; EPILEPSY; FACTUAL DATABASE; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYPERTENSION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS; PARKINSONIAN DISORDERS; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; PULMONARY DISEASE, CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SENTINEL SURVEILLANCE; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; VALIDATION STUDY; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ALGORITHMS; CANADA; CHRONIC DISEASE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DEMENTIA; DEPRESSION; DIABETES MELLITUS; ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS; EPILEPSY; FEMALE; HUMANS; HYPERTENSION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OSTEOARTHRITIS; PARKINSONIAN DISORDERS; PRIMARY HEALTH CARE; PULMONARY DISEASE, CHRONIC OBSTRUCTIVE; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SENTINEL SURVEILLANCE;

EID: 84904312430     PISSN: 15441709     EISSN: 15441717     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1370/afm.1644     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Birtwhistle R, Keshavjee K, Lambert-Lanning A, et al. Building a pan-Canadian primary care sentinel surveillance network: initial development and moving forward. J Am Board Fam Med. 2009;22(4):412-422.
2. Holbrook A, Thabane L, Keshavjee K, et al; COMPETE II Investigators. Individualized electronic decision support and reminders to improve diabetes care in the community: COMPETE II randomized trial. CMAJ. 2009;181(1-2):37-44.
3. Cebul RD, Love TE, Jain AK, Hebert CJ. Electronic health records and quality of diabetes care. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(9):825-833.
4. Kadhim-Saleh A, Green M, Williamson T, Hunter D, Birtwhistle R. Validation of the diagnostic algorithms for 5 chronic conditions in the Canadian Primary Care Sentinel Surveillance Network (CPCSSN): a Kingston practice-based research network (PBRN) report. J Am Board Fam Med. 2013;26(2):159-167.
5. Virnig BA, McBean M. Administrative data for public health surveillance and planning. Annu Rev Public Health. 2001;22(1):213-230.
6. Green ME, Hogg W, Savage C, et al. Assessing methods for measurement of clinical outcomes and quality of care in primary care practices. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:214.
7. Van Staa T P, Abenheim L. The quality of information recorded on a UK database of primary care records: a study of hospitalizations due to hypogylcemia and other conditions. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 1994;3(1):15-21.
8. Tu K, Manuel D, Lam K, Kavanagh D, Mitiku TF, Guo H. Diabetics can be identifed in an electronic medical record using laboratory tests and prescriptions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(4):431-435.
9. Hassey A, Gerrett D, Wilson A. A survey of validity and utility of electronic patient records in a general practice. BMJ. 2001;322(7299):1401-1405.
10. Hjerpe P, Merlo J, Ohlsson H, Bengtsson Boström K, Lindblad U. Validity of registration of ICD codes and prescriptions in a research database in Swedish primary care: a cross-sectional study in Skaraborg primary care database. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2010;10:23.
11. Quan H, Khan N, Hemmelgarn BR, et al; Hypertension Outcome and Surveillance Team of the Canadian Hypertension Education Programs. Validation of a case defnition to defne hypertension using administrative data. Hypertension. 2009;54(6):1423-1428.
12. Trinh NHT, Youn SJ, Sousa J, et al. Using electronic medical records to determine the diagnosis of clinical depression. Int J Med Inform. 2011;80(7):533-540.
13. Spettell CM, Wall TC, Allison J, et al. Identifying physician-recognized depression from administrative data: consequences for quality measurement. Health Serv Res. 2003;38(4):1081-1102.
14. Soriano JB, Maier WC, Visick G, Pride NB. Validation of general practitioner-diagnosed COPD in the UK General Practice Research Database. Eur J Epidemiol. 2001;17(12):1075-1080.
15. Lacasse Y, Daigle JM, Martin S, Maltais F. Validity of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease diagnoses in a large administrative database. Can Respir J. 2012;19(2):e5-e9.
16. Smidth M, Sokolowski I, Kærsvang L, Vedsted P. Developing an algorithm to identify people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) using administrative data. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2012;12:38.
17. Mapel DW, Frost FJ, Hurley JS, et al. An algorithm for the identif-cation of undiagnosed COPD cases using administrative claims data. J Manag Care Pharm. 2006;12(6):457-465.
18. Gabriel SE, Crowson CS, O'Fallon WM. A mathematical model that improves the validity of osteoarthritis diagnoses obtained from a computerized diagnostic database. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49(9): 1025-1029.
19. Wilchesky M, Tamblyn RM, Huang A. Validation of diagnostic codes within medical services claims. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57(2):131-141.
20. Quan H, Li B, Saunders LD, et al; IMECCHI Investigators. Assessing validity of ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data in recording clinical conditions in a unique dually coded database. Health Serv Res. 2008;43(4):1424-1441.
21. Jetté N, Reid AY, Quan H, Hill MD, Wiebe S. How accurate is ICD coding for epilepsy? Epilepsia. 2010;51(1):62-69.
22. Holden EW, Grossman E, Nguyen HT, et al. Developing a computer algorithm to identify epilepsy cases in managed care organizations. Dis Manag. 2005;8(1):1-14.
23. Swarztrauber K, Anau J, Peters D. Identifying and distinguishing cases of parkinsonism and Parkinson's disease using ICD-9 CM codes and pharmacy data. Mov Disord. 2005;20(8):964-970.
24. Khan NF, Harrison SE, Rose PW. Validity of diagnostic coding within the General Practice Research Database: a systematic review. Br J Gen Pract. 2010; 60 (572): e128-e136.
25. 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(1):4-14.