Cargando…
Appropriate definition of diabetes using an administrative database: A cross‐sectional cohort validation study
AIMS/INTRODUCTION: The purpose of the present study was to quantify errors in the diagnosis of diabetes for use in the national database, using a sufficient population size. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A claims database constructed by the JMDC (Tokyo, Japan), using standardized disease classifications an...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8847127/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34327864 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdi.13641 |
_version_ | 1784651983323398144 |
---|---|
author | Nishioka, Yuichi Takeshita, Saki Kubo, Shinichiro Myojin, Tomoya Noda, Tatsuya Okada, Sadanori Ishii, Hitoshi Imamura, Tomoaki Takahashi, Yutaka |
author_facet | Nishioka, Yuichi Takeshita, Saki Kubo, Shinichiro Myojin, Tomoya Noda, Tatsuya Okada, Sadanori Ishii, Hitoshi Imamura, Tomoaki Takahashi, Yutaka |
author_sort | Nishioka, Yuichi |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIMS/INTRODUCTION: The purpose of the present study was to quantify errors in the diagnosis of diabetes for use in the national database, using a sufficient population size. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A claims database constructed by the JMDC (Tokyo, Japan), using standardized disease classifications and anonymous record linkage, was used in this validation study. We included patients with health insurance claims data from April 2005 to March 2019 in the JMDC claims database. We excluded patients without a record of specific health checkups in Japan. Sample size calculation was based on a 5% prevalence of diabetes and 0.4% absolute accuracy (i.e., 1,250,000 individuals), to calculate the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. RESULTS: In total, 2,999,152 patients were included in this study, of which 165,515 were classified as having diabetes based on specific health checkups (validation cohort prevalence of 5.5%). The newly devised algorithm had three elements – the diagnosis‐related codes for diabetes without suspected flag, the medication codes for diabetes and then these two codes on the same record – and yielded a sensitivity of 74.6%, positive predictive value of 88.4% and Kappa Index of 0.80 (the highest values). CONCLUSIONS: In future claims database studies, our validated algorithms will be useful as diagnostic criteria for diabetes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8847127 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88471272022-02-25 Appropriate definition of diabetes using an administrative database: A cross‐sectional cohort validation study Nishioka, Yuichi Takeshita, Saki Kubo, Shinichiro Myojin, Tomoya Noda, Tatsuya Okada, Sadanori Ishii, Hitoshi Imamura, Tomoaki Takahashi, Yutaka J Diabetes Investig Original Articles AIMS/INTRODUCTION: The purpose of the present study was to quantify errors in the diagnosis of diabetes for use in the national database, using a sufficient population size. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A claims database constructed by the JMDC (Tokyo, Japan), using standardized disease classifications and anonymous record linkage, was used in this validation study. We included patients with health insurance claims data from April 2005 to March 2019 in the JMDC claims database. We excluded patients without a record of specific health checkups in Japan. Sample size calculation was based on a 5% prevalence of diabetes and 0.4% absolute accuracy (i.e., 1,250,000 individuals), to calculate the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value. RESULTS: In total, 2,999,152 patients were included in this study, of which 165,515 were classified as having diabetes based on specific health checkups (validation cohort prevalence of 5.5%). The newly devised algorithm had three elements – the diagnosis‐related codes for diabetes without suspected flag, the medication codes for diabetes and then these two codes on the same record – and yielded a sensitivity of 74.6%, positive predictive value of 88.4% and Kappa Index of 0.80 (the highest values). CONCLUSIONS: In future claims database studies, our validated algorithms will be useful as diagnostic criteria for diabetes. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2021-08-24 2022-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8847127/ /pubmed/34327864 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdi.13641 Text en © 2021 The Authors. Journal of Diabetes Investigation published by Asian Association for the Study of Diabetes (AASD) and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Nishioka, Yuichi Takeshita, Saki Kubo, Shinichiro Myojin, Tomoya Noda, Tatsuya Okada, Sadanori Ishii, Hitoshi Imamura, Tomoaki Takahashi, Yutaka Appropriate definition of diabetes using an administrative database: A cross‐sectional cohort validation study |
title | Appropriate definition of diabetes using an administrative database: A cross‐sectional cohort validation study |
title_full | Appropriate definition of diabetes using an administrative database: A cross‐sectional cohort validation study |
title_fullStr | Appropriate definition of diabetes using an administrative database: A cross‐sectional cohort validation study |
title_full_unstemmed | Appropriate definition of diabetes using an administrative database: A cross‐sectional cohort validation study |
title_short | Appropriate definition of diabetes using an administrative database: A cross‐sectional cohort validation study |
title_sort | appropriate definition of diabetes using an administrative database: a cross‐sectional cohort validation study |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8847127/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34327864 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdi.13641 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT nishiokayuichi appropriatedefinitionofdiabetesusinganadministrativedatabaseacrosssectionalcohortvalidationstudy AT takeshitasaki appropriatedefinitionofdiabetesusinganadministrativedatabaseacrosssectionalcohortvalidationstudy AT kuboshinichiro appropriatedefinitionofdiabetesusinganadministrativedatabaseacrosssectionalcohortvalidationstudy AT myojintomoya appropriatedefinitionofdiabetesusinganadministrativedatabaseacrosssectionalcohortvalidationstudy AT nodatatsuya appropriatedefinitionofdiabetesusinganadministrativedatabaseacrosssectionalcohortvalidationstudy AT okadasadanori appropriatedefinitionofdiabetesusinganadministrativedatabaseacrosssectionalcohortvalidationstudy AT ishiihitoshi appropriatedefinitionofdiabetesusinganadministrativedatabaseacrosssectionalcohortvalidationstudy AT imamuratomoaki appropriatedefinitionofdiabetesusinganadministrativedatabaseacrosssectionalcohortvalidationstudy AT takahashiyutaka appropriatedefinitionofdiabetesusinganadministrativedatabaseacrosssectionalcohortvalidationstudy |