Melanie H Jacobson, Meritxell Sabidó, Ana Sofia Afonso, Adebola Ajao, Eman A Alghamdi, Susan E Andrade, Dimitri Bennett, Vineetkumar Kharat, Marie-Laure Kürzinger, Maryline Le Noan-Lainé, Ditte Mølgaard-Nielsen, Gayle Murray, Elena Rivero-Ferrer, Sandra Lopez-Leon
{"title":"在常规收集的医疗数据中识别主要先天性畸形的算法:系统回顾。","authors":"Melanie H Jacobson, Meritxell Sabidó, Ana Sofia Afonso, Adebola Ajao, Eman A Alghamdi, Susan E Andrade, Dimitri Bennett, Vineetkumar Kharat, Marie-Laure Kürzinger, Maryline Le Noan-Lainé, Ditte Mølgaard-Nielsen, Gayle Murray, Elena Rivero-Ferrer, Sandra Lopez-Leon","doi":"10.1007/s40264-025-01606-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Major congenital malformations (MCMs) are a primary outcome of interest in pregnancy safety studies.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to identify and summarize algorithms used to identify MCMs in routinely collected healthcare data sources in the USA, Canada, and Europe by conducting a systematic literature review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a search strategy to identify studies containing algorithms for MCMs from January 1, 2010, to April 11, 2025. Search terms included those related to MCMs as an outcome, routinely collected healthcare data, epidemiologic designs likely to incorporate algorithms, and pregnant individuals and/or infants. Study review and data extraction was conducted in duplicate using a standardized data collection form.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the initially identified 2242 studies, 974 were selected for full-text review. Of these, 70.3% were excluded, leaving 289 studies. Over half (58.1%) of the included studies were from Europe, predominantly from Nordic countries using national register data (N = 135; 80.4%). Studies using claims (18.0%) or hospital discharge data (16.3%) were also common. Although there was heterogeneity in the timing of MCM assessment, 55.7% of studies collected MCMs through the infant's first year of life. Overall, algorithms varied across data source type and geography in the codes specified, rules, utilization of maternal versus infant records, and coding system. There were 27 (9.3%) validation studies, 70.4% of which were based on claims and/or electronic health record data only. Most had positive predictive values >70%, though this varied according to MCM type or anatomical site.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We provide the first comprehensive systematic literature review of algorithms used to identify MCMs in routinely collected healthcare data, aiding researchers in their ability to generate reliable evidence in pregnancy safety pharmacoepidemiology.</p>","PeriodicalId":11382,"journal":{"name":"Drug Safety","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Algorithms to Identify Major Congenital Malformations in Routinely Collected Healthcare Data: A Systematic Review.\",\"authors\":\"Melanie H Jacobson, Meritxell Sabidó, Ana Sofia Afonso, Adebola Ajao, Eman A Alghamdi, Susan E Andrade, Dimitri Bennett, Vineetkumar Kharat, Marie-Laure Kürzinger, Maryline Le Noan-Lainé, Ditte Mølgaard-Nielsen, Gayle Murray, Elena Rivero-Ferrer, Sandra Lopez-Leon\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40264-025-01606-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Major congenital malformations (MCMs) are a primary outcome of interest in pregnancy safety studies.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to identify and summarize algorithms used to identify MCMs in routinely collected healthcare data sources in the USA, Canada, and Europe by conducting a systematic literature review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We developed a search strategy to identify studies containing algorithms for MCMs from January 1, 2010, to April 11, 2025. Search terms included those related to MCMs as an outcome, routinely collected healthcare data, epidemiologic designs likely to incorporate algorithms, and pregnant individuals and/or infants. Study review and data extraction was conducted in duplicate using a standardized data collection form.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the initially identified 2242 studies, 974 were selected for full-text review. Of these, 70.3% were excluded, leaving 289 studies. Over half (58.1%) of the included studies were from Europe, predominantly from Nordic countries using national register data (N = 135; 80.4%). Studies using claims (18.0%) or hospital discharge data (16.3%) were also common. Although there was heterogeneity in the timing of MCM assessment, 55.7% of studies collected MCMs through the infant's first year of life. Overall, algorithms varied across data source type and geography in the codes specified, rules, utilization of maternal versus infant records, and coding system. There were 27 (9.3%) validation studies, 70.4% of which were based on claims and/or electronic health record data only. Most had positive predictive values >70%, though this varied according to MCM type or anatomical site.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>We provide the first comprehensive systematic literature review of algorithms used to identify MCMs in routinely collected healthcare data, aiding researchers in their ability to generate reliable evidence in pregnancy safety pharmacoepidemiology.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drug Safety\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-025-01606-w\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-025-01606-w","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Algorithms to Identify Major Congenital Malformations in Routinely Collected Healthcare Data: A Systematic Review.
Introduction: Major congenital malformations (MCMs) are a primary outcome of interest in pregnancy safety studies.
Objective: This study aimed to identify and summarize algorithms used to identify MCMs in routinely collected healthcare data sources in the USA, Canada, and Europe by conducting a systematic literature review.
Methods: We developed a search strategy to identify studies containing algorithms for MCMs from January 1, 2010, to April 11, 2025. Search terms included those related to MCMs as an outcome, routinely collected healthcare data, epidemiologic designs likely to incorporate algorithms, and pregnant individuals and/or infants. Study review and data extraction was conducted in duplicate using a standardized data collection form.
Results: Among the initially identified 2242 studies, 974 were selected for full-text review. Of these, 70.3% were excluded, leaving 289 studies. Over half (58.1%) of the included studies were from Europe, predominantly from Nordic countries using national register data (N = 135; 80.4%). Studies using claims (18.0%) or hospital discharge data (16.3%) were also common. Although there was heterogeneity in the timing of MCM assessment, 55.7% of studies collected MCMs through the infant's first year of life. Overall, algorithms varied across data source type and geography in the codes specified, rules, utilization of maternal versus infant records, and coding system. There were 27 (9.3%) validation studies, 70.4% of which were based on claims and/or electronic health record data only. Most had positive predictive values >70%, though this varied according to MCM type or anatomical site.
Conclusion: We provide the first comprehensive systematic literature review of algorithms used to identify MCMs in routinely collected healthcare data, aiding researchers in their ability to generate reliable evidence in pregnancy safety pharmacoepidemiology.
期刊介绍:
Drug Safety is the official journal of the International Society of Pharmacovigilance. The journal includes:
Overviews of contentious or emerging issues.
Comprehensive narrative reviews that provide an authoritative source of information on epidemiology, clinical features, prevention and management of adverse effects of individual drugs and drug classes.
In-depth benefit-risk assessment of adverse effect and efficacy data for a drug in a defined therapeutic area.
Systematic reviews (with or without meta-analyses) that collate empirical evidence to answer a specific research question, using explicit, systematic methods as outlined by the PRISMA statement.
Original research articles reporting the results of well-designed studies in disciplines such as pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacovigilance, pharmacology and toxicology, and pharmacogenomics.
Editorials and commentaries on topical issues.
Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in Drug Safety Drugs may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.