A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Validation of claims-based algorithms for identification of high-grade cervical dysplasia and cervical cancer. | LitMetric

Validation of claims-based algorithms for identification of high-grade cervical dysplasia and cervical cancer.

Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf

Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Brigham and Women's Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Division of Rheumatology, Immunology and Allergy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.

Published: November 2013

Background: High-grade cervical dysplasia or cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or worse has been widely used as a surrogate endpoint in cervical cancer screening or prevention trials.

Methods: To identify high-grade cervical dysplasia and cervical cancer, we developed claims-based algorithms that incorporated a combination of diagnosis and procedure codes using the billing data in an electronic medical records database and assessed the validity of the algorithms in an independent administrative claims database. We calculated the positive predictive value (PPV) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) of each algorithm, using new cytologic or pathologic diagnosis of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2 or 3, carcinoma in situ, or cervical cancer as the gold standard.

Results: Having ≥1 diagnosis code for high-grade cervical dysplasia or cervical cancer had a PPV of 57.1% (95%CI, 54.7-59.5%). By requiring ≥2 diagnoses for high-grade cervical dysplasia or cervical cancer, separated by 7-30 days, the PPV increased to 60.2% (95%CI, 53.9-66.1%). At least two diagnoses and a procedure code within a month from the first diagnosis date yielded a PPV of 80.7% (95%CI, 73.6-86.2%). The algorithms had greater PPVs in identifying prevalent high-grade cervical dysplasia or cervical cancer. Overall, the PPVs of these algorithms were similar or slightly lower in the external claims data than in the sample used to derive the algorithms.

Conclusions: Use of ≥2 diagnosis codes in combination with a procedure code appears to be a valid tool for studying high-grade cervical dysplasia and cervical cancer in both electronic medical record and administrative claims databases.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3855630PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pds.3520DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cervical cancer
32
high-grade cervical
28
cervical dysplasia
28
dysplasia cervical
28
cervical
17
claims-based algorithms
8
cancer
8
cervical intraepithelial
8
intraepithelial neoplasia
8
electronic medical
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!