A Systematic Review of Algorithms for Identifying Pediatric Neurodevelopmental Outcomes.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Sandra Lopez-Leon, Xuerong Wen, Sneha Gaitonde, Ana Sofia Afonso, Sandrine Colas, Rachael L DiSantostefano, Marie-Laure Kürzinger, Maryline Le Noan-Lainé, Vera Ruth Mitter, Gayle Murray, Meritxell Sabidó, Julie Scotto, Melanie H Jacobson, Rebecca L Bromley, Amir Sarayani
{"title":"A Systematic Review of Algorithms for Identifying Pediatric Neurodevelopmental Outcomes.","authors":"Sandra Lopez-Leon, Xuerong Wen, Sneha Gaitonde, Ana Sofia Afonso, Sandrine Colas, Rachael L DiSantostefano, Marie-Laure Kürzinger, Maryline Le Noan-Lainé, Vera Ruth Mitter, Gayle Murray, Meritxell Sabidó, Julie Scotto, Melanie H Jacobson, Rebecca L Bromley, Amir Sarayani","doi":"10.1002/pds.70196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Investigating pediatric neurodevelopmental outcomes (NDO) in studies using secondary data is often challenging due to heterogeneous clinical definitions and medical coding systems. This study aims to identify the algorithms used to define NDO in studies using electronic healthcare data through a systematic literature review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A search strategy was developed to identify studies on NDO that describe phenotype algorithms from January 1, 2010, to March 10, 2025. The search strategy included terms to identify studies containing algorithms for NDO as an outcome, routinely collected healthcare data, epidemiologic designs likely to incorporate algorithms, and pregnant individuals and/or infants/children. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility criteria and performed data extraction, with inconsistencies reviewed by a third reviewer. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize categorical and continuous variables appropriately.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The review included 156 publications that implemented algorithms for NDO, with 18 of these studies validating the outcomes. Most publications studied autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (n = 103, 65.6%) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (n = 72, 45.9%) either as a single outcome or as a composite.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Instead of presenting NDO as a composite outcome, it is recommended to present multiple single outcomes. Validated outcomes in data from Nordic countries demonstrate a high positive predictive value when using one code for diagnoses, while more complex algorithms are required for US data. Clearly detailing and establishing the time of assessment for each NDO is critical to inform valid epidemiological estimates.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 9","pages":"e70196"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12445936/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70196","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Investigating pediatric neurodevelopmental outcomes (NDO) in studies using secondary data is often challenging due to heterogeneous clinical definitions and medical coding systems. This study aims to identify the algorithms used to define NDO in studies using electronic healthcare data through a systematic literature review.

Methods: A search strategy was developed to identify studies on NDO that describe phenotype algorithms from January 1, 2010, to March 10, 2025. The search strategy included terms to identify studies containing algorithms for NDO as an outcome, routinely collected healthcare data, epidemiologic designs likely to incorporate algorithms, and pregnant individuals and/or infants/children. Two independent reviewers assessed eligibility criteria and performed data extraction, with inconsistencies reviewed by a third reviewer. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize categorical and continuous variables appropriately.

Results: The review included 156 publications that implemented algorithms for NDO, with 18 of these studies validating the outcomes. Most publications studied autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (n = 103, 65.6%) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (n = 72, 45.9%) either as a single outcome or as a composite.

Conclusions: Instead of presenting NDO as a composite outcome, it is recommended to present multiple single outcomes. Validated outcomes in data from Nordic countries demonstrate a high positive predictive value when using one code for diagnoses, while more complex algorithms are required for US data. Clearly detailing and establishing the time of assessment for each NDO is critical to inform valid epidemiological estimates.

Abstract Image

儿童神经发育结果识别算法的系统综述。
目的:由于不同的临床定义和医学编码系统,在使用二手数据的研究中调查儿科神经发育结局(NDO)往往具有挑战性。本研究旨在通过系统的文献综述,确定在使用电子医疗数据的研究中用于定义NDO的算法。方法:开发了一种搜索策略,以识别2010年1月1日至2025年3月10日期间描述表型算法的NDO研究。搜索策略包括以包含NDO算法作为结果的研究术语、常规收集的医疗保健数据、可能包含算法的流行病学设计、孕妇和/或婴儿/儿童。两名独立审稿人评估了资格标准并进行了数据提取,不一致性由第三名审稿人审查。使用描述性统计适当地总结分类和连续变量。结果:该综述包括156篇实施NDO算法的出版物,其中18篇研究验证了结果。大多数出版物将自闭症谱系障碍(ASD) (n = 103, 65.6%)和注意缺陷多动障碍(ADHD) (n = 72, 45.9%)作为单一结果或综合结果进行研究。结论:与其将NDO作为一个综合结局呈现,不如推荐呈现多个单一结局。来自北欧国家的数据验证结果表明,当使用一种代码进行诊断时,具有很高的阳性预测值,而美国数据则需要更复杂的算法。清楚地详细说明和确定每个NDO的评估时间对于为有效的流行病学估计提供信息至关重要。
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
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
173
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report. Particular areas of interest include: design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology; comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world; methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology; assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy; patterns of drug utilization; relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines; evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信