Validity of the Updated Rx-Risk Index as a Disease Identification and Risk-Adjustment Tool for Use in Observational Health Studies.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Clinical Interventions in Aging Pub Date : 2025-03-19 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.2147/CIA.S494145
Imaina Widagdo, Mhairi Kerr, Lisa Kalisch Ellett, Clement Schlegel, Elham Sadeqzadeh, Alvin Wang, Allison Louise Clarke, Nicole Pratt
{"title":"Validity of the Updated Rx-Risk Index as a Disease Identification and Risk-Adjustment Tool for Use in Observational Health Studies.","authors":"Imaina Widagdo, Mhairi Kerr, Lisa Kalisch Ellett, Clement Schlegel, Elham Sadeqzadeh, Alvin Wang, Allison Louise Clarke, Nicole Pratt","doi":"10.2147/CIA.S494145","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Identifying patient health conditions in observational studies is essential for accurately measuring healthcare practices and planning effective health policy interventions. This analysis evaluates the validity of the Rx-Risk Index, a tool that uses medication dispensing data to identify patient comorbidities and measure overall health. We examined an updated version of the Rx-Risk Index, reflecting changes in treatment practices, to assess its validity as a tool for identifying specific health conditions and as a measure of overall health to aid in risk adjustment in observational studies.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>We conducted a validation study using two Australian linked health datasets, the Person-Level Integrated Data Asset (PLIDA) and the National Health Data Hub (NHDH), from 2010 to 2018, focusing on individuals aged 65 years or older. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV/NPV, Cohen's kappa, and F1 scores were used to assess agreement between Rx-Risk Index conditions and two reference standards: patient self-reported conditions and hospital diagnosis. The Rx-Risk Index's predictive validity for one-year mortality was also evaluated using logistic regression, with model fit assessed by AIC and c-statistic.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data were analysed from 3,959 individuals in PLIDA and 157,709 individuals in NHDH. The Rx-Risk Index showed high sensitivity (≥75%) for diabetes, chronic airways disease, hyperlipidemia, and epilepsy against both self-reported conditions and hospital diagnoses. However, hyperlipidemia and hypertension showed lower specificity (<70%). High PPVs (≥78%) were observed for diabetes and renal failure. The agreement between the Rx-Risk Index and self-reported conditions was stronger (Cohen's kappa: 0.41-0.81 for 7 conditions) than between Rx-Risk Index and ICD10-AM diagnoses (kappa: 0.73 for one condition). The Rx-Risk Index was a strong predictor of one-year mortality, with c-statistic of 0.820 (95% CI: 0.817-0.825).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Selected Rx-Risk Index conditions are reasonable proxies for identifying specific conditions, particularly those requiring pharmacological management. The Rx-Risk Index was a strong predictor of one-year mortality, suggesting it is a valid measure of overall health. This study demonstrates the Rx-Risk Index's potential to enhance disease classification and risk adjustment in observational studies, supporting informed decision-making in health policy planning.</p>","PeriodicalId":48841,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Interventions in Aging","volume":"20 ","pages":"309-323"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11930017/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Interventions in Aging","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S494145","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Identifying patient health conditions in observational studies is essential for accurately measuring healthcare practices and planning effective health policy interventions. This analysis evaluates the validity of the Rx-Risk Index, a tool that uses medication dispensing data to identify patient comorbidities and measure overall health. We examined an updated version of the Rx-Risk Index, reflecting changes in treatment practices, to assess its validity as a tool for identifying specific health conditions and as a measure of overall health to aid in risk adjustment in observational studies.

Patients and methods: We conducted a validation study using two Australian linked health datasets, the Person-Level Integrated Data Asset (PLIDA) and the National Health Data Hub (NHDH), from 2010 to 2018, focusing on individuals aged 65 years or older. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV/NPV, Cohen's kappa, and F1 scores were used to assess agreement between Rx-Risk Index conditions and two reference standards: patient self-reported conditions and hospital diagnosis. The Rx-Risk Index's predictive validity for one-year mortality was also evaluated using logistic regression, with model fit assessed by AIC and c-statistic.

Results: Data were analysed from 3,959 individuals in PLIDA and 157,709 individuals in NHDH. The Rx-Risk Index showed high sensitivity (≥75%) for diabetes, chronic airways disease, hyperlipidemia, and epilepsy against both self-reported conditions and hospital diagnoses. However, hyperlipidemia and hypertension showed lower specificity (<70%). High PPVs (≥78%) were observed for diabetes and renal failure. The agreement between the Rx-Risk Index and self-reported conditions was stronger (Cohen's kappa: 0.41-0.81 for 7 conditions) than between Rx-Risk Index and ICD10-AM diagnoses (kappa: 0.73 for one condition). The Rx-Risk Index was a strong predictor of one-year mortality, with c-statistic of 0.820 (95% CI: 0.817-0.825).

Conclusion: Selected Rx-Risk Index conditions are reasonable proxies for identifying specific conditions, particularly those requiring pharmacological management. The Rx-Risk Index was a strong predictor of one-year mortality, suggesting it is a valid measure of overall health. This study demonstrates the Rx-Risk Index's potential to enhance disease classification and risk adjustment in observational studies, supporting informed decision-making in health policy planning.

目的:在观察性研究中确定患者的健康状况对于准确衡量医疗实践和规划有效的医疗政策干预措施至关重要。本分析评估了 "药物风险指数"(Rx-Risk Index)的有效性,该工具利用配药数据来识别患者的合并症并衡量总体健康状况。我们研究了反映治疗方法变化的最新版处方药风险指数,以评估其作为识别特定健康状况的工具和衡量总体健康状况的工具的有效性,从而帮助在观察性研究中进行风险调整:我们使用两个澳大利亚关联健康数据集--个人层面综合数据资产(PLIDA)和国家健康数据枢纽(NHDH)--进行了一项验证研究,研究时间为2010年至2018年,研究对象为65岁或65岁以上的老年人。灵敏度、特异性、PPV/NPV、科恩卡帕(Cohen's kappa)和 F1 分数用于评估药物风险指数条件与两个参考标准(患者自我报告条件和医院诊断)之间的一致性。此外,还使用逻辑回归评估了药物风险指数对一年死亡率的预测有效性,并通过 AIC 和 c 统计量评估了模型的拟合程度:对 PLIDA 的 3,959 人和 NHDH 的 157,709 人的数据进行了分析。对照自我报告病症和医院诊断,药物风险指数对糖尿病、慢性气道疾病、高脂血症和癫痫显示出较高的灵敏度(≥75%)。然而,高脂血症和高血压的特异性较低(结论:选定的药物风险指数病症是识别特定病症,尤其是需要药物治疗的病症的合理代用指标。药物风险指数是一年死亡率的有力预测指标,表明它是衡量总体健康状况的有效指标。这项研究表明,药物风险指数具有在观察性研究中加强疾病分类和风险调整的潜力,可为卫生政策规划中的知情决策提供支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Clinical Interventions in Aging
Clinical Interventions in Aging GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
2.80%
发文量
193
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical Interventions in Aging, is an online, peer reviewed, open access journal focusing on concise rapid reporting of original research and reviews in aging. Special attention will be given to papers reporting on actual or potential clinical applications leading to improved prevention or treatment of disease or a greater understanding of pathological processes that result from maladaptive changes in the body associated with aging. This journal is directed at a wide array of scientists, engineers, pharmacists, pharmacologists and clinical specialists wishing to maintain an up to date knowledge of this exciting and emerging field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信