International Classification of Diseases (ICD) Codes for Congenital Heart Defects (CHD) Have Variable and Limited Accuracy for Detecting CHD Cases
Ivey, L. C.; Rodriguez, F.; Shi, H.; Chong, C.; Chen, J.; Raskind-Hood, C. L.; Downing, K. F.; Farr, S. L.; Book, W. M.
Show abstract
BackgroundAdministrative data permits analysis of large cohorts but relies on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth and Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD) codes that may not reflect true congenital heart defects (CHD). Methods1497 cases with at least one encounter between 1/1/2010 - 12/31/2019 in two healthcare systems (one adult, one pediatric) identified by at least one of 87 ICD CHD codes were validated through chart review for the presence of CHD and CHD anatomic group. ResultsInter- and intra-observer reliability averaged > 95%. Positive predictive value (PPV) of ICD codes for CHD was 68.1% (1020/1497) overall, 94.6% (123/130) for cases identified in both healthcare systems, 95.8% (249/260) for severe codes, 52.6% (370/703) for shunt codes, 75.9% (243/320) for valve codes, 73.5% (119/162) for shunt and valve codes, and 75.0% (39/52) for "Other CHD" (7 ICD codes). PPV for cases with >1 unique CHD code was 85.4% (503/589) vs. 56.3% (498/884) for one CHD code. Of cases with secundum atrial septal defect ICD codes 745.5/Q21.1 in isolation, 30.9% (123/398) had a confirmed CHD. Patent foramen ovale was present in 66.2% (316/477) of false positives (FP). The median number of unique CHD-coded encounters was higher for true positives (TP) than FP (2.0; interquartile range [IQR]: 1.0-3.0 vs 1.0; IQR:1.0-1.0, respectively, p<0.0001). TP had younger mean age at first encounter with a CHD code than FP (22.4 years vs 26.3 years, p=0.0017). ConclusionPPV of CHD ICD codes varies by characteristics for detection of CHD by ICD code and anatomic grouping. While an ICD code for severe CHD and/or the presence of a case in more than one data source, regardless of anatomic group, is associated with higher PPV for CHD, most TP cases did not have these characteristics. The development of algorithms to improve accuracy may improve administrative data for CHD surveillance.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Trends in Gaps of Care for Congenital Heart Disease Patients: Implications for Social Determinants of Health and Child Opportunity Index 96%
- Predicting High-Risk Fetal Cardiac Disease Anticipated to Need Immediate Postnatal Stabilization and Intervention with Planned Pediatric Cardiac Operating Room Delivery 96%
- Right Heart Remodeling After Pulmonary Valve Replacement in Patients with Pulmonary Atresia or Critical Stenosis with Intact Ventricular Septum 95%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Standardized Data Elements for Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism: A Consensus Report from the Pulmonary Embolism Research Collaborative 94%
- Declining Trend of Sudden Cardiac Death in Younger Individuals: A 20–Year Nationwide Study 93%
- High Throughput Deep Learning Detection of Mitral Regurgitation 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on rates of congenital heart disease procedures among children: Prospective cohort analyses of 26,270 procedures in 17,860 children using CVD-COVID-UK consortium record linkage data 95%
- The Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Cardiology Services 93%
- Vascular Comorbidities Worsen Prognosis of Patients with Heart Failure Hospitalized with COVID-19 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Echocardiographic characterization and markers of cardiovascular risk in adults with sickle cell disease in a Colombian tertiary referral centre: a cross-sectional study 93%
- The effect of coronary revascularization treatment timing on mortality in patients with stable ischemic heart disease in British Columbia 93%
- External validation of a claims-based model to predict left ventricular ejection fraction class in patients with heart failure 92%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.