行政数据中癌症诊断研究的登记与基于索赔的索引日期。

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q3 ONCOLOGY
Sarah E Soppe, Sharon Peacock Hinton, Jamie C Halula, Jennifer L Lund, Chris D Baggett, Sandi L Pruitt, Megan A Mullins, Ellis C Dillon, Matthew E Barclay, Matthew Thompson, Nicholas Pettit, Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Caroline A Thompson
{"title":"行政数据中癌症诊断研究的登记与基于索赔的索引日期。","authors":"Sarah E Soppe, Sharon Peacock Hinton, Jamie C Halula, Jennifer L Lund, Chris D Baggett, Sandi L Pruitt, Megan A Mullins, Ellis C Dillon, Matthew E Barclay, Matthew Thompson, Nicholas Pettit, Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Caroline A Thompson","doi":"10.1007/s10552-024-01953-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Studies of healthcare encounters leading to cancer diagnosis have increased over recent years. While some studies examine healthcare utilization before the cancer registry date of diagnosis, relevant pre-diagnosis interactions are not always immediately prior to this date due to date abstraction guidelines. We evaluated agreement of a registry date with a claims-based index and examined Emergency Department (ED) involvement in cancer diagnosis as an example of possible pre-diagnostic healthcare misclassification that could arise from improper date choice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We implemented an algorithm to define a claims-based index as the date of the earliest International Classification of Diseases code for the cancer in Medicare and estimated agreement with the date of diagnosis from a North Carolina registry for patients diagnosed aged 66 or older with 16 cancer types from 2008 to 2017 (n = 92,056). We then classified whether each cancer was initially diagnosed through care originating in the ED using each date.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The index date was identical to the cancer registry date for 47% of patients and preceded the registry date for 28%, with extent of agreement varying by cancer- and patient-specific characteristics. Agreement in ED-involved diagnosis classification using each date varied by cancer site, with sensitivity of classifications using the registry date relative to the index having a minimum of 86% for prostate and kidney cancer.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Studies assessing healthcare utilization proximal to cancer diagnosis should carefully consider the relevant assessment window and be aware that the use of cancer registry versus claims-based dates may impact variable classification.</p>","PeriodicalId":9432,"journal":{"name":"Cancer Causes & Control","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Registry versus claims-based index dates for studies of cancer diagnosis in administrative data.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah E Soppe, Sharon Peacock Hinton, Jamie C Halula, Jennifer L Lund, Chris D Baggett, Sandi L Pruitt, Megan A Mullins, Ellis C Dillon, Matthew E Barclay, Matthew Thompson, Nicholas Pettit, Georgios Lyratzopoulos, Caroline A Thompson\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10552-024-01953-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Studies of healthcare encounters leading to cancer diagnosis have increased over recent years. While some studies examine healthcare utilization before the cancer registry date of diagnosis, relevant pre-diagnosis interactions are not always immediately prior to this date due to date abstraction guidelines. We evaluated agreement of a registry date with a claims-based index and examined Emergency Department (ED) involvement in cancer diagnosis as an example of possible pre-diagnostic healthcare misclassification that could arise from improper date choice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We implemented an algorithm to define a claims-based index as the date of the earliest International Classification of Diseases code for the cancer in Medicare and estimated agreement with the date of diagnosis from a North Carolina registry for patients diagnosed aged 66 or older with 16 cancer types from 2008 to 2017 (n = 92,056). We then classified whether each cancer was initially diagnosed through care originating in the ED using each date.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The index date was identical to the cancer registry date for 47% of patients and preceded the registry date for 28%, with extent of agreement varying by cancer- and patient-specific characteristics. Agreement in ED-involved diagnosis classification using each date varied by cancer site, with sensitivity of classifications using the registry date relative to the index having a minimum of 86% for prostate and kidney cancer.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Studies assessing healthcare utilization proximal to cancer diagnosis should carefully consider the relevant assessment window and be aware that the use of cancer registry versus claims-based dates may impact variable classification.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9432,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer Causes & Control\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer Causes & Control\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-024-01953-6\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer Causes & Control","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10552-024-01953-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:近年来,对导致癌症诊断的医疗保健遭遇的研究有所增加。虽然一些研究在癌症诊断登记日期之前检查医疗保健利用情况,但由于日期抽象指南,相关的诊断前互动并不总是在此日期之前立即进行。我们评估了注册日期与基于索赔的索引的一致性,并检查了急诊科(ED)参与癌症诊断的情况,作为可能因日期选择不当而导致的诊断前医疗保健错误分类的一个例子。方法:我们实施了一种算法,将基于索赔的索引定义为医疗保险中癌症的最早国际疾病分类代码的日期,并估计与2008年至2017年诊断为66岁或以上的16种癌症类型的北卡罗来纳州登记处的诊断日期一致(n = 92,056)。然后,我们使用每个日期对每一种癌症是否最初是通过起源于急诊科的护理诊断出来的进行分类。结果:索引日期与47%的患者的癌症登记日期相同,28%的患者在登记日期之前,其一致程度因癌症和患者特异性特征而异。使用每个日期对ed相关诊断分类的一致性因癌症部位而异,前列腺癌和肾癌使用登记日期相对于指数分类的敏感性至少为86%。结论:评估癌症诊断近端医疗保健利用的研究应仔细考虑相关评估窗口,并意识到使用癌症登记与基于索赔的日期可能会影响变量分类。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Registry versus claims-based index dates for studies of cancer diagnosis in administrative data.

Purpose: Studies of healthcare encounters leading to cancer diagnosis have increased over recent years. While some studies examine healthcare utilization before the cancer registry date of diagnosis, relevant pre-diagnosis interactions are not always immediately prior to this date due to date abstraction guidelines. We evaluated agreement of a registry date with a claims-based index and examined Emergency Department (ED) involvement in cancer diagnosis as an example of possible pre-diagnostic healthcare misclassification that could arise from improper date choice.

Methods: We implemented an algorithm to define a claims-based index as the date of the earliest International Classification of Diseases code for the cancer in Medicare and estimated agreement with the date of diagnosis from a North Carolina registry for patients diagnosed aged 66 or older with 16 cancer types from 2008 to 2017 (n = 92,056). We then classified whether each cancer was initially diagnosed through care originating in the ED using each date.

Results: The index date was identical to the cancer registry date for 47% of patients and preceded the registry date for 28%, with extent of agreement varying by cancer- and patient-specific characteristics. Agreement in ED-involved diagnosis classification using each date varied by cancer site, with sensitivity of classifications using the registry date relative to the index having a minimum of 86% for prostate and kidney cancer.

Conclusion: Studies assessing healthcare utilization proximal to cancer diagnosis should carefully consider the relevant assessment window and be aware that the use of cancer registry versus claims-based dates may impact variable classification.

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
Cancer Causes & Control
Cancer Causes & Control 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
4.30%
发文量
130
审稿时长
6.6 months
期刊介绍: Cancer Causes & Control is an international refereed journal that both reports and stimulates new avenues of investigation into the causes, control, and subsequent prevention of cancer. By drawing together related information published currently in a diverse range of biological and medical journals, it has a multidisciplinary and multinational approach. The scope of the journal includes: variation in cancer distribution within and between populations; factors associated with cancer risk; preventive and therapeutic interventions on a population scale; economic, demographic, and health-policy implications of cancer; and related methodological issues. The emphasis is on speed of publication. The journal will normally publish within 30 to 60 days of acceptance of manuscripts. Cancer Causes & Control publishes Original Articles, Reviews, Commentaries, Opinions, Short Communications and Letters to the Editor which will have direct relevance to researchers and practitioners working in epidemiology, medical statistics, cancer biology, health education, medical economics and related fields. The journal also contains significant information for government agencies concerned with cancer research, control and policy.
×
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