Beyond Phecodes: leveraging PheMAP to identify patients lacking diagnosis codes in electronic health records.

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q1 COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS
Chao Yan, Monika E Grabowska, Rut Thakkar, Alyson L Dickson, Peter J Embí, QiPing Feng, Joshua C Denny, Vern Eric Kerchberger, Bradley A Malin, Wei-Qi Wei
{"title":"Beyond Phecodes: leveraging PheMAP to identify patients lacking diagnosis codes in electronic health records.","authors":"Chao Yan, Monika E Grabowska, Rut Thakkar, Alyson L Dickson, Peter J Embí, QiPing Feng, Joshua C Denny, Vern Eric Kerchberger, Bradley A Malin, Wei-Qi Wei","doi":"10.1093/jamia/ocaf055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Diagnosis codes documented in electronic health records (EHR) are often relied upon to clinically phenotype patients for biomedical research. However, these diagnoses can be incomplete and inaccurate, leading to false negatives when searching for patients with phenotypes of interest. This study aims to determine whether PheMAP, a comprehensive knowledgebase integrating multiple clinical terminologies beyond diagnosis to capture phenotypes, can effectively identify patients lacking relevant EHR diagnosis codes.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We investigated a collection of 3.5 million patient records from Vanderbilt University Medical Center's EHR and focused on 4 well-studied phenotypes: (1) type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), (2) dementia, (3) prostate cancer, and (4) sensorineural hearing loss. We applied PheMAP to match structured concepts in patient records and calculated a phenotype risk score (PheScore) to indicate patient-phenotype similarity. Patients meeting predefined PheScore criteria but lacking diagnosis codes were identified. Clinically knowledgeable experts adjudicated randomly selected patients per phenotype as Positive, Possibly Positive, or Negative.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our approach indicated that 5.3% of patients lacked a diagnosis for T2DM, 4.5% for dementia, 2.2% for prostate cancer, and 0.2% for sensorineural hearing loss. The expert review indicated 100% precision (for Possibly Positive or Positive cases) for dementia and sensorineural hearing loss, and 90.0% and 85.0% precision for T2DM and prostate cancer, respectively. Excluding Possibly Positive cases, the precision for T2DM and prostate cancer was 88.9% and 81.3%, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Leveraging clinical terminologies incorporated by PheMAP can effectively identify patients with phenotypes who lack EHR diagnosis codes, thereby enhancing phenotyping quality and related research reliability.</p>","PeriodicalId":50016,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocaf055","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, INFORMATION SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Diagnosis codes documented in electronic health records (EHR) are often relied upon to clinically phenotype patients for biomedical research. However, these diagnoses can be incomplete and inaccurate, leading to false negatives when searching for patients with phenotypes of interest. This study aims to determine whether PheMAP, a comprehensive knowledgebase integrating multiple clinical terminologies beyond diagnosis to capture phenotypes, can effectively identify patients lacking relevant EHR diagnosis codes.

Materials and methods: We investigated a collection of 3.5 million patient records from Vanderbilt University Medical Center's EHR and focused on 4 well-studied phenotypes: (1) type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), (2) dementia, (3) prostate cancer, and (4) sensorineural hearing loss. We applied PheMAP to match structured concepts in patient records and calculated a phenotype risk score (PheScore) to indicate patient-phenotype similarity. Patients meeting predefined PheScore criteria but lacking diagnosis codes were identified. Clinically knowledgeable experts adjudicated randomly selected patients per phenotype as Positive, Possibly Positive, or Negative.

Results: Our approach indicated that 5.3% of patients lacked a diagnosis for T2DM, 4.5% for dementia, 2.2% for prostate cancer, and 0.2% for sensorineural hearing loss. The expert review indicated 100% precision (for Possibly Positive or Positive cases) for dementia and sensorineural hearing loss, and 90.0% and 85.0% precision for T2DM and prostate cancer, respectively. Excluding Possibly Positive cases, the precision for T2DM and prostate cancer was 88.9% and 81.3%, respectively.

Conclusions: Leveraging clinical terminologies incorporated by PheMAP can effectively identify patients with phenotypes who lack EHR diagnosis codes, thereby enhancing phenotyping quality and related research reliability.

超越 Phecodes:利用 PheMAP 识别电子健康记录中缺乏诊断代码的患者。
目的:在生物医学研究中,电子健康记录(EHR)中记录的诊断代码通常依赖于临床表型患者。然而,这些诊断可能是不完整和不准确的,导致在寻找感兴趣的表型患者时出现假阴性。PheMAP是一个综合了诊断之外的多个临床术语来捕获表型的综合知识库,该研究旨在确定PheMAP是否可以有效地识别缺乏相关EHR诊断代码的患者。材料和方法:我们从范德比尔特大学医学中心的电子病历中收集了350万例患者的记录,并重点研究了4种已得到充分研究的表型:(1)2型糖尿病(T2DM),(2)痴呆,(3)前列腺癌和(4)感音神经性听力损失。我们应用PheMAP来匹配患者记录中的结构化概念,并计算表型风险评分(PheScore)来表明患者-表型相似性。符合预先定义的PheScore标准但缺乏诊断代码的患者被确定。临床知识渊博的专家根据表型随机选择患者为阳性,可能阳性或阴性。结果:我们的方法显示5.3%的患者未被诊断为T2DM, 4.5%的患者未被诊断为痴呆,2.2%的患者未被诊断为前列腺癌,0.2%的患者未被诊断为感音神经性听力损失。专家评价表明,痴呆和感音神经性听力损失的准确率为100%(可能阳性或阳性病例),T2DM和前列腺癌的准确率分别为90.0%和85.0%。排除可能阳性病例,T2DM和前列腺癌的诊断准确率分别为88.9%和81.3%。结论:利用PheMAP纳入的临床术语可以有效识别缺乏EHR诊断代码的表型患者,从而提高表型质量和相关研究的可靠性。
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
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 医学-计算机:跨学科应用
CiteScore
14.50
自引率
7.80%
发文量
230
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: JAMIA is AMIA''s premier peer-reviewed journal for biomedical and health informatics. Covering the full spectrum of activities in the field, JAMIA includes informatics articles in the areas of clinical care, clinical research, translational science, implementation science, imaging, education, consumer health, public health, and policy. JAMIA''s articles describe innovative informatics research and systems that help to advance biomedical science and to promote health. Case reports, perspectives and reviews also help readers stay connected with the most important informatics developments in implementation, policy and education.
×
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