2020
DOI: 10.1111/cei.13526
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of scoring systems for primary immunodeficiency diagnosis in adult immunology clinics

Abstract: Our research applies a scoring system designed to identify undiagnosed primary immunodeficiency in a population of adults presenting to an immunology clinic. Key findings include that modification of the scoring system with additional criteria may improve its sensitivity and specificity in identifying those with primary immunodeficiency based on their clinical history.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
(19 reference statements)
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Like most approaches based on databases of payor claims, this method did not include laboratory values. Retrospective gathering of features like we performed here has been useful in aggregating the phenotypic features of patients with IEIs into a score that can discern those with IEIs from those with secondary immunodeficiencies ( 31 ). Recent work used a Bayesian network model to score “risk” in a framework that categorized individuals into either high-, medium-, or low-risk categories of having any IEI ( 30 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Like most approaches based on databases of payor claims, this method did not include laboratory values. Retrospective gathering of features like we performed here has been useful in aggregating the phenotypic features of patients with IEIs into a score that can discern those with IEIs from those with secondary immunodeficiencies ( 31 ). Recent work used a Bayesian network model to score “risk” in a framework that categorized individuals into either high-, medium-, or low-risk categories of having any IEI ( 30 ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An algorithm developed by the Modell Foundation improved IEI diagnoses by using a summation of diagnostic codes [28] and another recent algorithm that summed weighted ICD codes further improved diagnoses [29]; however, these approaches did not include laboratory values. Retrospective gathering of features like we performed here has been useful in aggregating the phenotypic features of patients with IEIs into a score that can discern those with IEIs from those with secondary immunodeficiencies [30]. Recent work used a 18 Bayesian network model to score "risk" in a framework that categorized individuals into either high, medium, or low-risk categories of having any IEI [29].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A family history of primary immunodeficiency More recent observations indicate that the JMF warning signs are not ideal [18,19] due to one third of patients with IEI not fulfilling any criteria from the list [16] and some symptoms such as failure to thrive are not adapted to adults [20]. In the case of a first child with IEI in a family or some severe IEI, the 10 warning signs may not be useful [16].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%