Cargando…

The validity of dementia diagnoses in routinely collected electronic health records in the United Kingdom: A systematic review

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to assess the validity of codes or algorithms used to identify dementia in UK electronic health record (EHR) primary care and hospitalisation databases. METHODS: Relevant studies were identified by searching the MEDLINE/EMBASE databases from inception to June 201...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McGuinness, Luke A., Warren‐Gash, Charlotte, Moorhouse, Louisa R., Thomas, Sara L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6519035/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30667114
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pds.4669
_version_ 1783418571982897152
author McGuinness, Luke A.
Warren‐Gash, Charlotte
Moorhouse, Louisa R.
Thomas, Sara L.
author_facet McGuinness, Luke A.
Warren‐Gash, Charlotte
Moorhouse, Louisa R.
Thomas, Sara L.
author_sort McGuinness, Luke A.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to assess the validity of codes or algorithms used to identify dementia in UK electronic health record (EHR) primary care and hospitalisation databases. METHODS: Relevant studies were identified by searching the MEDLINE/EMBASE databases from inception to June 2018, hand‐searching reference lists, and consulting experts. The search strategy included synonyms for “Dementia”, “Europe”, and “EHR”. Studies were included if they validated dementia diagnoses in UK primary care or hospitalisation databases, irrespective of validation method used. The Quality Assessment for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies‐2 (QUADAS‐2) tool was used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: From 1469 unique records, 14 relevant studies were included. Thirteen validated individual diagnoses against a reference standard, reporting high estimates of validity. Most reported only the positive predictive value (PPV), with estimates ranging between 0.09 and 1.0 and 0.62 and 0.85 in primary care and hospitalisation databases, respectively. One study performed a rate comparison, indicating good generalisability of dementia diagnoses in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database to the UK population. Studies were of low methodological quality. As studies were not comparable, no summary validity estimates were produced. CONCLUSION: While heterogenous across studies, reported validity estimates were generally high. However, the credibility of these estimates is limited by the methodological quality of studies, primarily resulting from insufficient blinding of researchers interpreting the reference test. Inadequate reporting, particularly of the specific codes validated, hindered comparison of estimates across studies. Future validation studies should make use of more robust reference tests, follow established reporting guidelines, and calculate all measures of validity.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6519035
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65190352019-05-21 The validity of dementia diagnoses in routinely collected electronic health records in the United Kingdom: A systematic review McGuinness, Luke A. Warren‐Gash, Charlotte Moorhouse, Louisa R. Thomas, Sara L. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Original Reports PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to assess the validity of codes or algorithms used to identify dementia in UK electronic health record (EHR) primary care and hospitalisation databases. METHODS: Relevant studies were identified by searching the MEDLINE/EMBASE databases from inception to June 2018, hand‐searching reference lists, and consulting experts. The search strategy included synonyms for “Dementia”, “Europe”, and “EHR”. Studies were included if they validated dementia diagnoses in UK primary care or hospitalisation databases, irrespective of validation method used. The Quality Assessment for Diagnostic Accuracy Studies‐2 (QUADAS‐2) tool was used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: From 1469 unique records, 14 relevant studies were included. Thirteen validated individual diagnoses against a reference standard, reporting high estimates of validity. Most reported only the positive predictive value (PPV), with estimates ranging between 0.09 and 1.0 and 0.62 and 0.85 in primary care and hospitalisation databases, respectively. One study performed a rate comparison, indicating good generalisability of dementia diagnoses in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database to the UK population. Studies were of low methodological quality. As studies were not comparable, no summary validity estimates were produced. CONCLUSION: While heterogenous across studies, reported validity estimates were generally high. However, the credibility of these estimates is limited by the methodological quality of studies, primarily resulting from insufficient blinding of researchers interpreting the reference test. Inadequate reporting, particularly of the specific codes validated, hindered comparison of estimates across studies. Future validation studies should make use of more robust reference tests, follow established reporting guidelines, and calculate all measures of validity. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-01-22 2019-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6519035/ /pubmed/30667114 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pds.4669 Text en © 2019 The Authors. Pharmacoepidemiology & Drug Safety Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Reports
McGuinness, Luke A.
Warren‐Gash, Charlotte
Moorhouse, Louisa R.
Thomas, Sara L.
The validity of dementia diagnoses in routinely collected electronic health records in the United Kingdom: A systematic review
title The validity of dementia diagnoses in routinely collected electronic health records in the United Kingdom: A systematic review
title_full The validity of dementia diagnoses in routinely collected electronic health records in the United Kingdom: A systematic review
title_fullStr The validity of dementia diagnoses in routinely collected electronic health records in the United Kingdom: A systematic review
title_full_unstemmed The validity of dementia diagnoses in routinely collected electronic health records in the United Kingdom: A systematic review
title_short The validity of dementia diagnoses in routinely collected electronic health records in the United Kingdom: A systematic review
title_sort validity of dementia diagnoses in routinely collected electronic health records in the united kingdom: a systematic review
topic Original Reports
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6519035/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30667114
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pds.4669
work_keys_str_mv AT mcguinnesslukea thevalidityofdementiadiagnosesinroutinelycollectedelectronichealthrecordsintheunitedkingdomasystematicreview
AT warrengashcharlotte thevalidityofdementiadiagnosesinroutinelycollectedelectronichealthrecordsintheunitedkingdomasystematicreview
AT moorhouselouisar thevalidityofdementiadiagnosesinroutinelycollectedelectronichealthrecordsintheunitedkingdomasystematicreview
AT thomassaral thevalidityofdementiadiagnosesinroutinelycollectedelectronichealthrecordsintheunitedkingdomasystematicreview
AT mcguinnesslukea validityofdementiadiagnosesinroutinelycollectedelectronichealthrecordsintheunitedkingdomasystematicreview
AT warrengashcharlotte validityofdementiadiagnosesinroutinelycollectedelectronichealthrecordsintheunitedkingdomasystematicreview
AT moorhouselouisar validityofdementiadiagnosesinroutinelycollectedelectronichealthrecordsintheunitedkingdomasystematicreview
AT thomassaral validityofdementiadiagnosesinroutinelycollectedelectronichealthrecordsintheunitedkingdomasystematicreview