Release-aware, SAS-equivalent Elixhauser comorbidity scoring in R: cross-implementation validation and application to Texas inpatient discharges
Tran, M.; Pei, D.
Show abstract
The Elixhauser comorbidity measures are among the most widely used risk adjusters in administrative health data. Their reference implementation, published by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) as SAS programs, has eleven annual releases in two families, one screening pre-existing conditions on the present-on-admission (POA) indicator and the earlier one on Medicare Severity Diagnosis-Related Group, and no implementation of every release existed outside SAS. We developed `ecsr10`, an open-source R package covering all eleven releases of both families, with a browser-based application over the same functions, and validated it against AHRQ's own SAS programs over 40,027,114 value-level comparisons with zero disagreements. Two existing open-source reimplementations scored on the same dataset showed reproducible defects. We then used the package to quantify two choices AHRQ's software leaves to the analyst and studies seldom report, the release and the handling of diagnoses not present on admission, on the Texas Inpatient Public Use Data File, 2016 Q1-2019 Q4 (8,585,244 adult discharges from 726 hospitals), scoring one predefined cohort under every release and pre-existing-condition setting. POA handling dominated: disabling POA changed the comorbidity profile of 56.7% of admissions, and a POA-naive mortality index scored higher on discrimination (area under the curve 0.807 versus 0.789; difference 0.0183, 95% confidence interval 0.0161-0.0204) by counting in-hospital complications as pre-existing disease. POA reporting was bimodal across hospitals, so pooled hospital comparisons on such a file partly compare documentation practice. Because the cohort predates every release compared, the release contrast is a lower bound: the release chosen between v2022.1 and v2026.1 changed at least one comorbidity flag for 0.0036% of admissions, yet a single revision of ten mortality weights changed the comorbidity index for 42.4% of them. An exactly validated implementation makes such choices measurable; release, POA handling and the implementation used should be reported as study characteristics.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- allofus: An R package to facilitate use of the All of Us Researcher Workbench 91%
- Assessing the quality of clinical and administrative data extracted from hospitals: The General Medicine Inpatient Initiative (GEMINI) experience 91%
- medExtractR: A medication extraction algorithm for electronic health records using the R programming language 91%
Similar papers in this journal
- Quantitative bias analysis in practice: Review of software for regression with unmeasured confounding 90%
- External control arm analysis: an evaluation of propensity score approaches, G-computation, and doubly debiased machine learning 89%
- Evaluation of SURUS: a Named Entity Recognition System to Extract Knowledge from Interventional Study Records 89%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Temporal Relationship of Computed and Structured Diagnoses in Electronic Health Record Data 90%
- Combining structured and unstructured data in eMRs to create clinically-defined eMR-derived cohorts 89%
- Implicit bias in Critical Care Data: Factors affecting sampling frequencies and missingness patterns of clinical and biological variables in ICU Patients 89%
"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.