加拿大行政健康数据中 SARS-CoV-2 感染诊断的有效性:一项基于人口的多省队列研究。

CMAJ open Pub Date : 2023-09-05 Print Date: 2023-09-01 DOI:10.9778/cmajo.20220152
Lisa M Lix, Christel Renoux, Carolina Moriello, Ko Long Choi, Colin R Dormuth, Anat Fisher, Matthew Dahl, Fangyun Wu, Ayesha Asaf, J Michael Paterson
{"title":"加拿大行政健康数据中 SARS-CoV-2 感染诊断的有效性:一项基于人口的多省队列研究。","authors":"Lisa M Lix, Christel Renoux, Carolina Moriello, Ko Long Choi, Colin R Dormuth, Anat Fisher, Matthew Dahl, Fangyun Wu, Ayesha Asaf, J Michael Paterson","doi":"10.9778/cmajo.20220152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accurate coding of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection in administrative data benefits population-based studies about the epidemiology, treatment and outcomes of COVID-19. We describe the validity of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded in hospital discharge abstracts, emergency department records and outpatient physician service claims from 3 Canadian provinces.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cohort study, population-based inpatient, emergency department and outpatient records were linked to SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR; reference standard) test results from British Columbia, Manitoba and Ontario for Apr. 1, 2020, to Mar. 31, 2021. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection were estimated for each quarter in the study period, overall and by province, age group and sex.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our study encompassed more than 13 million SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results. Specificity and NPV of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection were consistently high (i.e., most estimates were > 95%). Overall sensitivity estimates were 86.2%, 60.4% and 20.3% in the first quarter for inpatient, emergency department and outpatient cohorts, and 66.2%, 47.5% and 25.0% in the last quarter, respectively. For inpatients, overall PPV estimates ranged from 50.0% to 66.4%. For emergency department patients, overall PPV estimates were 76.9% and 68.3% in the first and last quarters, respectively. For outpatients, PPV estimates were 6.8% and 29.1% in the first and last quarters, respectively.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>We found variations in the validity of diagnoses for SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded in different health care settings, geographic areas and over time. Our multiprovince validation study provides evidence about the potential use of inpatient and emergency department records as an alternative to population-based laboratory data for identification of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, but does not support the use of outpatient claims for this purpose.</p>","PeriodicalId":10432,"journal":{"name":"CMAJ open","volume":"11 5","pages":"E790-E798"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/89/26/cmajo.20220152.PMC10482491.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Canadian administrative health data: a multiprovince, population-based cohort study.\",\"authors\":\"Lisa M Lix, Christel Renoux, Carolina Moriello, Ko Long Choi, Colin R Dormuth, Anat Fisher, Matthew Dahl, Fangyun Wu, Ayesha Asaf, J Michael Paterson\",\"doi\":\"10.9778/cmajo.20220152\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accurate coding of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection in administrative data benefits population-based studies about the epidemiology, treatment and outcomes of COVID-19. We describe the validity of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded in hospital discharge abstracts, emergency department records and outpatient physician service claims from 3 Canadian provinces.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this cohort study, population-based inpatient, emergency department and outpatient records were linked to SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR; reference standard) test results from British Columbia, Manitoba and Ontario for Apr. 1, 2020, to Mar. 31, 2021. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection were estimated for each quarter in the study period, overall and by province, age group and sex.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our study encompassed more than 13 million SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results. Specificity and NPV of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection were consistently high (i.e., most estimates were > 95%). Overall sensitivity estimates were 86.2%, 60.4% and 20.3% in the first quarter for inpatient, emergency department and outpatient cohorts, and 66.2%, 47.5% and 25.0% in the last quarter, respectively. For inpatients, overall PPV estimates ranged from 50.0% to 66.4%. For emergency department patients, overall PPV estimates were 76.9% and 68.3% in the first and last quarters, respectively. For outpatients, PPV estimates were 6.8% and 29.1% in the first and last quarters, respectively.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>We found variations in the validity of diagnoses for SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded in different health care settings, geographic areas and over time. Our multiprovince validation study provides evidence about the potential use of inpatient and emergency department records as an alternative to population-based laboratory data for identification of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, but does not support the use of outpatient claims for this purpose.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10432,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CMAJ open\",\"volume\":\"11 5\",\"pages\":\"E790-E798\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/89/26/cmajo.20220152.PMC10482491.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CMAJ open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20220152\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/9/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Print\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CMAJ open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20220152","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在行政数据中对 SARS-CoV-2 感染诊断进行准确编码有利于对 COVID-19 的流行病学、治疗和结果进行基于人群的研究。我们描述了加拿大 3 个省的医院出院摘要、急诊科记录和门诊医生服务索赔中记录的 SARS-CoV-2 感染诊断的有效性:在这项队列研究中,我们将不列颠哥伦比亚省、马尼托巴省和安大略省 2020 年 4 月 1 日至 2021 年 3 月 31 日的住院病人、急诊科和门诊病人记录与 SARS-CoV-2 聚合酶链反应(PCR;参考标准)检测结果联系起来。对研究期间每个季度的 SARS-CoV-2 感染诊断的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值 (PPV) 和阴性预测值 (NPV) 进行了估计,并按省份、年龄组和性别进行了分类:我们的研究涵盖了 1 300 多万份 SARS-CoV-2 PCR 检测结果。SARS-CoV-2 感染诊断的特异性和 NPV 一直很高(即大多数估计值大于 95%)。第一季度住院病人、急诊科和门诊病人的总体灵敏度分别为 86.2%、60.4% 和 20.3%,最后一季度分别为 66.2%、47.5% 和 25.0%。住院患者的总体 PPV 估计值介于 50.0% 到 66.4% 之间。对于急诊科患者,第一季度和最后一个季度的总体 PPV 估计值分别为 76.9% 和 68.3%。门诊病人的 PPV 估计值在第一季度和最后一个季度分别为 6.8% 和 29.1%:我们发现,在不同的医疗机构、不同的地理区域和不同的时间段,SARS-CoV-2 感染诊断的有效性存在差异。我们的多省验证研究提供了证据,证明可以使用住院和急诊科记录替代基于人群的实验室数据来识别 SARS-CoV-2 感染患者,但并不支持为此目的使用门诊病人报销单。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Validity of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Canadian administrative health data: a multiprovince, population-based cohort study.

Validity of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Canadian administrative health data: a multiprovince, population-based cohort study.

Validity of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Canadian administrative health data: a multiprovince, population-based cohort study.

Validity of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection in Canadian administrative health data: a multiprovince, population-based cohort study.

Background: Accurate coding of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection in administrative data benefits population-based studies about the epidemiology, treatment and outcomes of COVID-19. We describe the validity of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded in hospital discharge abstracts, emergency department records and outpatient physician service claims from 3 Canadian provinces.

Methods: In this cohort study, population-based inpatient, emergency department and outpatient records were linked to SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction (PCR; reference standard) test results from British Columbia, Manitoba and Ontario for Apr. 1, 2020, to Mar. 31, 2021. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection were estimated for each quarter in the study period, overall and by province, age group and sex.

Results: Our study encompassed more than 13 million SARS-CoV-2 PCR test results. Specificity and NPV of diagnoses of SARS-CoV-2 infection were consistently high (i.e., most estimates were > 95%). Overall sensitivity estimates were 86.2%, 60.4% and 20.3% in the first quarter for inpatient, emergency department and outpatient cohorts, and 66.2%, 47.5% and 25.0% in the last quarter, respectively. For inpatients, overall PPV estimates ranged from 50.0% to 66.4%. For emergency department patients, overall PPV estimates were 76.9% and 68.3% in the first and last quarters, respectively. For outpatients, PPV estimates were 6.8% and 29.1% in the first and last quarters, respectively.

Interpretation: We found variations in the validity of diagnoses for SARS-CoV-2 infection recorded in different health care settings, geographic areas and over time. Our multiprovince validation study provides evidence about the potential use of inpatient and emergency department records as an alternative to population-based laboratory data for identification of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection, but does not support the use of outpatient claims for this purpose.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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