Diagnostic codes used in healthcare administration have been employed extensively in clinical research to identify target patient populations, including demonstration of important clinical outcomes among adults with congenital heart disease. However, little is known about the reliability of code-derived data in this context. We sought to determine the accuracy of International Classification of Disease-9th Revision (ICD-9) diagnoses and the reliability of retrieval algorithms in adults with congenital heart disease (ACHD). Pilot testing of a hierarchical algorithm to identify ACHD patients and determine their principle congenital diagnosis was performed. A revised algorithm was then applied retrospectively to a sample of all outpatients seen by providers who see general cardiology and ACHD patients. Using all ICD-9 codes available from any encounter, accuracy for detection and categorization of sub-types were compared to physician chart review. After initial testing on 334 patients, the revised algorithm was applied to 740 patients. The sensitivity and specificity for ACHD patient identification from this specialty clinic population were 99 and 88 %, respectively. Of 411 (56 %) non-ACHD patients, 49 were incorrectly categorized as ACHD by the algorithm. Of ACHD patients, 326 of 329 were correctly identified by diagnostic codes and categorization of ACHD defect sub-type was correct in 263 (80 %). Administrative data can be used for identification of ACHD patients based on ICD-9 codes with excellent sensitivity and reasonable specificity. Accurate categorization that would be utilized for quality indicators by ACHD defect type is less robust. Additional testing should be done using non-referral populations.
Oncotype DX resulted in net QALY gain and increased overall costs, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $10,770. For CHS, Oncotype DX represents an effective and affordable approach to favorably affect the lives of women with ESBC.
Since the late 1990 s, there has been an unprecedented growth in the development of new molecular and proteomic assays for clinical decision making. Despite the thousands of tests available, a standardized, well-defined, and coherent evaluation framework for these molecular assays is still lacking. We aim to summarize the publicly available appraisal criteria and to develop a succinct and accessible set of criteria that can provide a roadmap for the appraisal of gene-based laboratory developed tests (LDTs). We conducted a systematic literature review of the available molecular diagnostic framework in PubMed MD and CINAHL and identified 91 articles on existing appraisal criteria. We provided a summary of the historical appraisal system and developed an analysis of these appraisal systems, LDT-SynFRAME, which details the major criteria for evaluating molecular diagnostics in the clinical setting. Our goal with the LDT-SynFRAME system is to promote a well-informed dialog among all the stakeholders responsible for the development, approval, reimbursement, and use of new molecular classifiers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.