Chart review and genetic validation of electronic medical record dementia diagnoses in VA: The impact of CMS data
Logue, M.; Lee, S. O.; Gillis, M.; Zhang, R.; Lee, M.; Marra, D.; Lopez, F. V.; Lynch, J.; Panizzon, M. S.; Tsuang, D. W.; Hauger, R. L.; The MVP Cognitive Decline and Dementia During Aging Working Group, ; Program, V. M. V.; Merritt, V. C.
Show abstract
Background: International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes are often used in epidemiological studies to track disease rates over time. Objective: This evaluation of ICD-code-based algorithms for electronic medical record (EMR) studies of Alzheimers disease (AD) and related dementias (ADRD) examines the impact of incorporating Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS) data as an additional source of diagnostic and treatment information in Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) EMR studies. Methods: We performed a chart review of 100 VA Million Veteran Program (MVP) participants to evaluate algorithm performance. We also assessed genetic associations across algorithms in a large MVP cohort (n=396k). Results: Adding CMS data increased the number of detected cases, sensitivity, and positive predictive value, but decreased specificity and negative predictive value. Genetic analyses showed that broader (ADRD/dementia) algorithms with just VA data performed similarly to narrow (AD-focused) algorithms incorporating both VA and CMS ICD codes. Additionally, narrow AD algorithms based solely on VA data yielded the highest ORs, indicating the largest proportion of late-onset AD cases. Conclusions: We recommend using a broad (ADRD) algorithm without CMS or medication data, particularly for epidemiological studies or a strict AD algorithm including CMS and medication cases for genetic discovery of late-onset AD associations in VA EMR, and a strict AD algorithm without CMS data for applications focused solely on AD and sensitive to misspecification. Careful evaluation of algorithm performance is warranted in different EMR systems, as ICD coding practices vary by institution, as demonstrated by this comparison of VA EMR and CMS data.
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Frequency of Variants in Mendelian Alzheimer’s Disease Genes within the Alzheimer’s Disease Sequencing Project (ADSP) 94%
- Race/Ethnic Disparities in Mild Cognitive Impairment and Dementia: The Northern Manhattan Study 93%
- Exploring the genetic heterogeneity of Alzheimer’s disease: Evidence for genetic subtypes 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Use of Lecanemab and Donanemab in the Canadian Healthcare System: Evidence, Challenges, and Areas for Future Research 95%
- Using Machine Learning and Electronic Health Record (EHR) Data for the Early Prediction of Alzheimer’s Disease and Related Dementias 94%
- Real-world datasets for the International Registry for Alzheimer’s Disease and Other Dementias (InRAD) and other registries: an international consensus 93%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Explainable artificial intelligence identifies an AQP4 polymorphism-based risk score associated with brain amyloid burden 94%
- Mitochondrial pathway polygenic risk scores are associated with Alzheimer's Disease 94%
- Integrating plasma, MRI, and cognitive biomarkers for personalized prediction of decline across cognitive domains 93%
"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.