Derivation and Validation of ICD-10 Codes for Identifying Incident Stroke.

Importance: Claims data with International Statistical Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes are routinely used in clinical research. However, the use of ICD-10 codes to define incident stroke has not been validated against expert-adjudicated outcomes in the US population. Objective: To develop and validate the accuracy of an ICD-10 code list to detect incident stroke events using Medicare inpatient fee-for-service claims data. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data from 2 prospective population-based cohort studies, the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study and the Reasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study, and included participants aged 65 years or older without prior stroke who had linked Medicare claims data. Stroke events in the ARIC and REGARDS studies were identified via active surveillance and adjudicated by expert review. Medicare-linked ARIC data (2016-2018) were used to develop a list of ICD-10 codes for incident stroke detection. The list was validated using Medicare-linked REGARDS data (2016-2019). Data were analyzed from September 1, 2022, through September 30, 2023. Exposures: Stroke events detected in Medicare claims vs expert-adjudicated stroke events in the ARIC and REGARDS studies. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcomes were sensitivity and specificity of incident stroke detection using ICD-10 codes. Results: In the ARIC study, there were 110 adjudicated incident stroke events among 5194 participants (mean [SD] age, 80.1 [5.3] years) over a median follow-up of 3.0 (range, 0.003-3.0) years. Most ARIC participants were women (3160 [60.8%]); 993 (19.1%) were Black and 4180 (80.5%) were White. Using the primary diagnosis code on a Medicare billing claim, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 81.8% (95% CI, 73.3%-88.5%) and a specificity of 99.1% (95% CI, 98.8%-99.3%) to detect incident stroke. Using any diagnosis code on a Medicare billing claim, the sensitivity was 94.5% (95% CI, 88.5%-98.0%) and the specificity was 98.4% (95% CI, 98.0%-98.8%). In the REGARDS study, there were 140 adjudicated incident strokes among 6359 participants (mean [SD] age, 75.8 [7.0] years) over a median follow-up of 4.0 (range, 0-4.0) years. More than half of the REGARDS participants were women (3351 [52.7%]); 1774 (27.9%) were Black and 4585 (72.1%) were White. For the primary diagnosis code, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 70.7% (95% CI, 63.2%-78.3%) and a specificity of 99.1% (95% CI, 98.9%-99.4%). For any diagnosis code, the ICD-10 code list had a sensitivity of 77.9% (95% CI, 71.0%-84.7%) and a specificity of 98.9% (95% CI, 98.6%-99.2%). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that ICD-10 codes could be used to identify incident stroke events in Medicare claims with moderate sensitivity and high specificity.

Validation of the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision-Clinical Modification Diagnostic Code for Essential Tremor.

Background: The positive predictive value (PPV) of the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision-Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) code for "essential and other specified forms of tremor" in identifying essential tremor (ET) cases was found to be less than 50%. The ability of the ICD-10-CM G25.0 code for "essential tremor" to identify ET has not been determined. The study objective was to determine the PPV of the G25.0 code. Methods: Patients in a tertiary health system with a primary care encounter associated with ICD-10-CM code G25.0 in 2022 underwent medical record review to determine if the consensus criteria from the International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society for an ET diagnosis were met. Results: 442 patients were included. The PPV of G25.0 in identifying probable ET cases was 74.7% (95% confidence interval (CI) 70.4-78.5%). Among patients prescribed propranolol, the PPV improved to 87.8% (95% CI 78.0-93.6%). Discussion: Compared to the ICD-9-CM code 333.1, G25.0 is superior for identifying ET cases. A potential limitation of this study is that the consensus criteria applied relies on nonspecific physical exam findings which may lead to an overestimation of the PPV of G25.0. Highlights: The ICD-10-CM diagnosis code for essential tremor has not been previously validated. The objective of this study was to determine the PPV of the G25.0 code. The PPV in identifying essential tremor cases was 74.7%. The PPV improved among patients prescribed propranolol.

Transition database for rare diseases and its use for clinical documentation.

Patients with rare diseases commonly suffer from severe symptoms as well as chronic and sometimes life-threatening effects. Not only the rarity of the diseases but also the poor documentation of rare diseases often leads to an immense delay in diagnosis. One of the main problems here is the inadequate coding with common classifications such as the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. Instead, the ORPHAcode enables precise naming of the diseases. So far, just few approaches report in detail how the technical implementation of the ORPHAcode is done in clinical practice and for research. We present a concept and implementation of storing and mapping of ORPHAcodes. The Transition Database for Rare Diseases contains all the information of the Orphanet catalog and serves as the basis for documentation in the clinical information system as well as for monitoring Key Performance Indicators for rare diseases at the hospital. The five-step process (especially using open source tools and the DataVault 2.0 logic) for set-up the Transition Database allows the approach to be adapted to local conditions as well as to be extended for additional terminologies and ontologies.

Improving Accuracy of Administrative Data for Perforated Appendicitis Classification.

INTRODUCTION: Reliance on International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) diagnosis codes may misclassify perforated appendicitis with resultant research, fiscal, and public health implications. We aimed to improve the accuracy of administrative data for perforated appendicitis classification relying on ICD-10-CM codes from 2015 to 2018. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of randomly sampled patients aged ≤18 years diagnosed with acute appendicitis from eight children's hospitals. Patients were identified using the Pediatric Health Information System, and true perforation status was determined by medical record review. We developed two algorithms by leveraging Pediatric Health Information System data elements and data mining (DM) approaches. The two developed algorithm performance was compared against algorithms that exclusively relied on ICD-10-CM codes using area under the curve and other measures. RESULTS: Of 1051 clinically validated encounters that were included, 383 (36.4%) patients were identified to have perforated appendicitis. The two algorithms developed using DM approaches primarily leveraged ICD-10-CM codes and length of stay. DM-developed algorithms had a significantly higher accuracy than algorithms relying exclusively on ICD-10-CM (P value < 0.01): sensitivity and specificity for DM-developed algorithms were 0.86-0.88 and 0.95-0.97, respectively, which were overall higher than algorithms that relied on only ICD-10-CM. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an algorithm that can improve the accuracy of perforated appendicitis classification using commonly available elements in administrative data. We recommend that this algorithm is used in future appendicitis classification to ensure valid reporting, hospital-level benchmarking, and fiscal or public health assessments.

Accuracy of routinely collected hospital administrative discharge data and death certificate ICD-10 diagnostic coding in progressive supranuclear palsy and corticobasal syndrome: a systematic review and validation study.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a systematic review to identify existing ICD-10 coding validation studies in progressive supranuclear palsy and corticobasal syndrome [PSP/CBS]) and, in a new study, evaluated the accuracy of ICD-10 diagnostic codes for PSP/CBS in Scottish hospital inpatient and death certificate data. METHODS: Original studies that assessed the accuracy of specific ICD-10 diagnostic codes in PSP/CBS were sought. Separately, we estimated the positive predictive value (PPV) of specific codes for PSP/CBS in inpatient hospital data (SMR01, SMR04) compared to clinical diagnosis in four regions. Sensitivity was assessed in one region due to a concurrent prevalence study. For PSP, the consistency of the G23.1 code in inpatient and death certificate coding was evaluated across Scotland. RESULTS: No previous ICD-10 validation studies were identified. 14,767 records (SMR01) and 1497 records (SMR04) were assigned the candidate ICD-10 diagnostic codes between February 2011 and July 2019. The best PPV was achieved with G23.1 (1.00, 95% CI 0.93-1.00) in PSP and G23.9 in CBS (0.20, 95% CI 0.04-0.62). The sensitivity of G23.1 for PSP was 0.52 (95% CI 0.33-0.70) and G31.8 for CBS was 0.17 (95% CI 0.05-0.45). Only 38.1% of deceased G23.1 hospital-coded cases also had this coding on their death certificate: the majority (49.0%) erroneously assigned the G12.2 code. DISCUSSION: The high G23.1 PPV in inpatient data shows it is a useful tool for PSP case ascertainment, but death certificate coding is inaccurate. The PPV and sensitivity of existing ICD-10 codes for CBS are poor due to a lack of a specific code.

Validity and reliability International Classification of Diseases-10 codes for all forms of injury: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Intentional and unintentional injuries are a leading cause of death and disability globally. International Classification of Diseases (ICD), Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes are used to classify injuries in administrative health data and are widely used for health care planning and delivery, research, and policy. However, a systematic review of their overall validity and reliability has not yet been done. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of the validity and reliability of external cause injury ICD-10 codes. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, COCHRANE, and SCOPUS were searched (inception to April 2023) for validity and/or reliability studies of ICD-10 external cause injury codes in all countries for all ages. We examined all available data for external cause injuries and injuries related to specific body regions. Validity was defined by sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Reliability was defined by inter-rater reliability (IRR), measured by Krippendorff's alpha, Cohen's Kappa, and/or Fleiss' kappa. RESULTS: Twenty-seven published studies from 2006 to 2023 were included. Across all injuries, the mean outcome values and ranges were sensitivity: 61.6% (35.5%-96.0%), specificity: 91.6% (85.8%-100%), PPV: 74.9% (58.6%-96.5%), NPV: 80.2% (44.6%-94.4%), Cohen's kappa: 0.672 (0.480-0.928), Krippendorff's alpha: 0.453, and Fleiss' kappa: 0.630. Poisoning and hand and wrist injuries had higher mean sensitivity (84.4% and 96.0%, respectively), while self-harm and spinal cord injuries were lower (35.5% and 36.4%, respectively). Transport and pedestrian injuries and hand and wrist injuries had high PPVs (96.5% and 92.0%, respectively). Specificity and NPV were generally high, except for abuse (NPV 44.6%). CONCLUSIONS AND SIGNIFICANCE: The validity and reliability of ICD-10 external cause injury codes vary based on the injury types coded and the outcomes examined, and overall, they only perform moderately well. Future work, potentially utilizing artificial intelligence, may improve the validity and reliability of ICD codes used to document injuries.

Validation of the Diagnostic Accuracy Levels of International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision Codes for Diabetic Ketoacidosis: A Multicentre, Cross-sectional Study of Adults.

OBJECTIVES: International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes are commonly used to identify cases of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) in health services research, but they have not been validated. Our aim in this study was to assess the accuracy of ICD, 10th revision (ICD-10) diagnosis codes for DKA. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre, cross-sectional study using data from 5 hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Each hospitalization event has a single most responsible diagnosis code. We identified all hospitalizations assigned diagnosis codes for DKA. A true case of DKA was defined using laboratory values (serum bicarbonate ≤18 mmol/L, arterial pH ≤7.3, anion gap ≥14 mEq/L, and presence of ketones in urine or blood). Chart review was conducted to validate DKA if laboratory values were missing or the diagnosis of DKA was unclear. Outcome measures included positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity, and specificity of ICD-10 codes in patients with laboratory-defined DKA. RESULTS: We identified 316,517 hospitalizations. Among these, 312,948 did not have an ICD-10 diagnosis code for DKA and 3,569 had an ICD-10 diagnosis code for DKA. Using a combination of laboratory and chart review, we identified that the overall PPV was 67.0%, the NPV was 99.7%, specificity was 99.6%, and sensitivity was 74.9%. When we restricted our analysis to hospitalizations in which DKA was the most responsible discharge diagnosis (n=3,374 [94.5%]), the test characteristics were PPV 69.8%, NPV 99.7%, specificity 99.7%, and sensitivity 71.9%. CONCLUSION: ICD-10 codes can identify patients with DKA among those admitted to general internal medicine.

Assessment of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) Code Assignment Validity for Case Finding of Medication-related Hypoglycemia Acute Care Visits Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

OBJECTIVE: Administrative claims are commonly relied upon to identify hypoglycemia. We assessed validity of 14 International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis code assignments to identify medication-related hypoglycemia leading to acute care encounters. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A multisite, retrospective medical record review study was conducted in a sample of Medicare beneficiaries prescribed outpatient diabetes medications and who received hospital care between January 1, 2016 and September 30, 2017. Diagnosis codes were validated with structured medical record review using prespecified criteria (clinical presentation, blood glucose values, and treatments for hypoglycemia). Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value (PPV, NPV) were calculated and adjusted using sampling weights to correct for partial verification bias. RESULTS: Among 990 encounters (496 cases, 494 controls), hypoglycemia codes demonstrated moderate PPV (69.2%; 95% confidence interval: 65.0-73.0) and moderate sensitivity (83.9%; 95% confidence interval: 70.0-95.5). Codes performed better at identifying hypoglycemic events among emergency department/observation encounters compared with hospitalizations (PPV 92.9%, sensitivity 100.0% vs. PPV 53.7%, sensitivity 71.0%). Accuracy varied by diagnosis position, especially for hospitalizations, with PPV of 95.6% versus 46.5% with hypoglycemia in primary versus secondary positions. Use of adverse event/poisoning codes did not improve accuracy; reliance on these codes alone would have missed 97% of true hypoglycemic events. CONCLUSIONS: Accuracy of International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes in administrative claims to identify medication-related hypoglycemia varied substantially by encounter type and diagnosis position. Consideration should be given to the trade-off between PPV and sensitivity when selecting codes, encounter types, and diagnosis positions to identify hypoglycemia.

Confirmatory factor analysis of the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS-5) based on DSM-5 vs. ICD-11 criteria.

Introduction: Many studies have investigated the latent structure of the DSM-5 criteria for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, most research on this topic was based on self-report data. We aimed to investigate the latent structure of PTSD based on a clinical interview, the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS-5). Method: A clinical sample of 345 participants took part in this multi-centre study. Participants were assessed with the CAPS-5 and the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL-5). We evaluated eight competing models of DSM-5 PTSD symptoms and three competing models of ICD-11 PTSD symptoms. Results: The internal consistency of the CAPS-5 was replicated. In CFAs, the Anhedonia model emerged as the best fitting model within all tested DSM-5 models. However, when compared with the Anhedonia model, the non-nested ICD-11 model as a less complex three-factor solution showed better model fit indices. Discussion: We discuss the findings in the context of earlier empirical findings as well as theoretical models of PTSD.

Introducción: Muchos estudios han investigado la estructura latente de los criterios DSM-5 para el trastorno de estrés postraumático (TEPT). Sin embargo, la mayoría de la investigación en este tema estuvo basada en datos de auto-reporte. Nuestro objetivo fue investigar la estructura latente del TEPT basado en una entrevista clínica, la Escala de TEPT administrada por el Clínico (CAPS-5 por su sigla en inglés).Método: En este estudio multicéntrico participó una muestra clínica de 345 personas. Los participantes fueron evaluados con la CAPS-5 y la Lista de Chequeo de Trastorno de Estrés Postraumático (PCL-5, por su sigla en inglés). Evaluamos ocho modelos competitivos de síntomas de TEPT del DSM-5 y tres modelos competitivos de síntomas de TEPT de la CIE-11.Resultados: La consistencia interna de la CAPS-5 fue replicada. En los AFC el modelo de anhedonia emergió como el de mejor ajuste entre todos los modelos del DSM-5 evaluados. Sin embargo, cuando se comparó con el modelo de anhedonia, el modelo no anidado de CIE-11 como una solución menos compleja de tres factores mostró mejores índices de ajuste de modelo.Discusión: Discutimos los hallazgos en el contexto de los resultados empíricos previos y de los modelos teóricos del TEPT.

Comparing reliability of ICD-10-based COVID-19 comorbidity data to manual chart review, a retrospective cross-sectional study.

International Statistical Classification of Disease and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision codes (ICD-10) are used to characterize cohort comorbidities. Recent literature does not demonstrate standardized extraction methods. OBJECTIVE: Compare COVID-19 cohort manual-chart-review and ICD-10-based comorbidity data; characterize the accuracy of different methods of extracting ICD-10-code-based comorbidity, including the temporal accuracy with respect to critical time points such as day of admission. DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study. MEASUREMENTS: ICD-10-based-data performance characteristics relative to manual-chart-review. RESULTS: Discharge billing diagnoses had a sensitivity of 0.82 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79-0.85; comorbidity range: 0.35-0.96). The past medical history table had a sensitivity of 0.72 (95% CI: 0.69-0.76; range: 0.44-0.87). The active problem list had a sensitivity of 0.67 (95% CI: 0.63-0.71; range: 0.47-0.71). On day of admission, the active problem list had a sensitivity of 0.58 (95% CI: 0.54-0.63; range: 0.30-0.68)and past medical history table had a sensitivity of 0.48 (95% CI: 0.43-0.53; range: 0.30-0.56). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: ICD-10-based comorbidity data performance varies depending on comorbidity, data source, and time of retrieval; there are notable opportunities for improvement. Future researchers should clearly outline comorbidity data source and validate against manual-chart-review.

Complex PTSD: what is the clinical utility of the diagnosis?

Background: The diagnosis of complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) was included in the 11th revised edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). CPTSD shares trauma-specific symptoms with its sibling disorder PTSD but is additionally characterized by disturbances of the individual's self-organization (DSO). The clinical utility of the CPTSD diagnosis has yet to be thoroughly investigated. Objective: The current study aimed to examine the clinical utility of the CPTSD diagnosis, considering the upcoming implementation of ICD-11 in clinical practice. Method: International field studies, construct- and validity analyses leading up to the inclusion in ICD-11 are reviewed, and the diagnostic measures; International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ) and International Trauma Interview (ITI) are presented. Also, the relationship between CPTSD and borderline personality disorder (BPD) is elaborated in an independent analysis, to clarify their differences in clinical relevance to treatment. Treatment implications for CPTSD are discussed with reference to existing guidelines and clinical needs. Results: The validation of ITQ and ITI contributes to the cementation of CPTSD in further clinical practice, providing qualified assessment of the construct, with intended informative value for both clinical communication and facilitation of treatment. CPTSD is found distinguishable from both PTSD and BPD in empirical studies, while the possibility of comorbid BPD/PTSD cases being better described as CPTSD is acknowledged. Practitioners need to employ well-established methods developed for PTSD, while considering additional DSO-symptoms in treatment of CPTSD. Conclusions: The inclusion of CPTSD in ICD-11 may potentially facilitate access to more tailored treatment interventions, as well as contribute to increased research focus on disorders specifically associated with stress. The clinical utility value of this additional diagnosis is expected to reveal itself further after ICD-11 is implemented in clinical practice in 2022 and onwards. Yet, CPTSD's diagnostic inclusion gives future optimism to assessing and treating complex posttraumatic stress symptoms.

Antecedentes: El diagnóstico del trastorno de estrés postraumático (TEPT-C) fue incluido en la 11va. edición revisada de la Clasificación Internacional de las Enfermedades (CIE-11). El TEPT-C comparte síntomas específicos del trauma con su trastorno primo el TEPT, pero es adicionalmente caracterizado por trastornos en la autoorganización del individuo (DSO en su sigla en inglés). La utilidad clínica del diagnóstico del TEPT-C no ha sido investigado comprehensivamente todavía.Objetivo: El presente estudio busca examinar la utilidad clínica del diagnóstico del TEPT-C, considerando la pronta implementación del CIE-11 en la práctica clínica.Método: Se revisaron los estudios de campo internacionales y los análisis de validez y constructo que llevaron a la inclusión del CIE-11, y se presentan las medidas diagnósticas, Cuestionario Internacional del Trauma (ITQ en su sigla en inglés) y la Entrevista Internacional del Trauma (ITI en su sigla en inglés). También, la relación entre TEPT-C y el trastorno de personalidad limítrofe (BPD en su sigla en inglés) se elaboró en un análisis independiente, para clarificar las diferencias de la relevancia clínica para el tratamiento. Las implicaciones del tratamiento del TEPT-C se discuten con referencia a las guías existentes y las necesidades clínicas.Resultados: La validación del ITQ y ITI contribuye a la consolidación del TEPT-C en la subsecuente práctica clínica, proporcionando una evaluación calificada del constructo, con el valour informativo intencionado para tanto la comunicación clínica como para la facilitación del tratamiento. Se encontró que el TEPT-C se distingue de tanto el TEPT como del BPD en los estudios empíricos, mientras que se reconoce la posibilidad de que la comorbilidad en los casos de BPD/TEPT sean mejor explicados como TEPT-C. Los profesionales necesitan emplear métodos bien establecidos desarrollados para el TEPT, mientras consideran los síntomas adicionales de DSO en el tratamiento del TEPT-C.Conclusiones: La inclusión del TEPT-C en el CIE-11 podría facilitar potencialmente el acceso a más intervenciones de tratamiento adaptado, así como también contribuir a aumentar el foco de investigación en los trastornos especialmente asociados con el estrés. Se espera que el valour de la utilidad clínica de este diagnóstico adicional sea revelado por sí mismo luego de que el CIE-11 sea implementado en la práctica clínica desde el 2022 en adelante. Aun así, la inclusión diagnóstica del TEPT-C proporciona un futuro optimista para evaluar y tratar los síntomas de estrés postraumático complejo.

IC-Behavior: An interdisciplinary taxonomy of behaviors.

Academic disciplines are often organized according to the behaviors they examine. While most research on a behavior tends to exist within one discipline, some behaviors are examined by multiple disciplines. Better understanding of behaviors and their relationships should enable knowledge transfer across disciplines and theories, thereby dramatically improving the behavioral knowledge base. We propose a taxonomy built on the World Health Organization's International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF), but design the taxonomy as a stand-alone extension rather than an improvement to ICF. Behaviors considered important enough to serve as the dependent variable in articles accepted for publication in top journals were extracted from nine different behavioral and social disciplines. A six-step development and validation process was employed, leading to the final taxonomy. A hierarchy of behaviors under the top banner of Engaging in activities/participating, reflective of ICF's D. hierarchy was constructed with eight immediate domains addressing behaviors ranging from learning, exercising, self-care, and substance use. The resulting International Classification of Behaviors (IC-Behavior), provides a behavior taxonomy targeted towards the interdisciplinary integration of nomological networks relevant to behavioral theories. While IC-Behavior has been labeled v.1.0 to communicate that it is by no means an endpoint, it has empirically shown to provide flexibility for the addition of new behaviors and is tested in the health domain.

Psychiatric disorders in individuals with neurofibromatosis 1 in Denmark: A nationwide register-based cohort study.

The aim of this study was to assess the risks of psychiatric disorders in a large cohort of 905 individuals with NF1 and 7614 population comparisons matched on sex and year of birth. The cohort was linked to the Danish Psychiatric Central Research Register to ascertain information on hospital contacts for psychiatric disorders based on the International Classification of Diseases version 8 and 10. The hazard ratio (HR) for a first psychiatric hospital contact was higher in girls (4.19, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.81-9.69) and boys with NF1 (5.02, 95% CI 3.27-7.69) <7 years of age than in the population comparisons. Both sexes had increased HRs for developmental disorders, including attention deficit/hyperactivity disorders, autism spectrum disorders, and intellectual disabilities in childhood. Females with NF1 had also increased HRs for unipolar depression, other emotional and behavioral disorders, and severe stress reaction and adjustment disorders in early adulthood. The HRs for psychoses, schizophrenia, bipolar disorders, and substance abuse were similar in individuals with NF1 and the population comparisons. Finally, the cumulative incidence of a first hospital contact due to any psychiatric disorder by age 30 years was 35% (95% CI 29-41) in females and 28% (95% CI 19-37) in males with NF1. Thus, screening for psychiatric disorders may be important for early diagnosis and facilitation of appropriate and effective treatment in individuals with NF1.

Accuracy of the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS)-4 and GDS-5 for the screening of depression among older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) is a widely used instrument to assess depression in older adults. The short GDS versions that have four (GDS-4) and five items (GDS-5) represent alternatives for depression screening in limited-resource settings. However, their accuracy remains uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of the GDS-4 and GDS-5 versions for depression screening in older adults. METHODS: Until May 2020, we systematically searched PubMed, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Google Scholar; for studies that have assessed the sensitivity and specificity of GDS-4 and GDS-5 for depression screening in older adults. We conducted meta-analyses of the sensitivity and specificity of those studies that used the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) or the International Classification of Diseases-10 (ICD-10) as reference standard. Study quality was assessed with the QUADAS-2 tool. We performed bivariate random-effects meta-analyses to calculate the pooled sensitivity and specificity with their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) at each reported common cut-off. For the overall meta-analyses, we evaluated each GDS-4 version or GDS-5 version separately by each cut-off, and for investigations of heterogeneity, we assessed altogether across similar GDS versions by each cut-off. Also, we assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE methodology. RESULTS: Twenty-three studies were included and meta-analyzed, assessing eleven different GDS versions. The number of participants included was 5048. When including all versions together, at a cut-off 2, GDS-4 had a pooled sensitivity of 0.77 (95% CI: 0.70-0.82) and a pooled specificity of 0.75 (0.68-0.81); while GDS-5 had a pooled sensitivity of 0.85 (0.80-0.90) and a pooled specificity of 0.75 (0.69-0.81). We found results for more than one GDS-4 version at cut-off points 1, 2, and 3; and for more than one GDS-5 version at cut-off points 1, 2, 3, and 4. Mostly, significant subgroup differences at different test thresholds across versions were found. The accuracy of the different GDS-4 and GDS-5 versions showed a high heterogeneity. There was high risk of bias in the index test domain. Also, the certainty of the evidence was low or very low for most of the GDS versions. CONCLUSIONS: We found several GDS-4 and GDS-5 versions that showed great heterogeneity in estimates of sensitivity and specificity, mostly with a low or very low certainty of the evidence. Altogether, our results indicate the need for more well-designed studies that compare different GDS versions.

Examining the reliability of ICD-10 discharge coding in Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital administrative database.

BACKGROUND: Discharge diagnostic data from hospital administrative databases are often used to inform decisions relating to a variety of vital applications. These may include the allocation of resources, quality-of-care assessments, clinical research and formulation of healthcare policy. Accurately coded and reliably captured patient discharge data are of paramount importance for any hospital and health system to function efficiently. OBJECTIVES: To retrospectively examine the reliability of the International Classification of Diseases version 10 (ICD-10) discharge coding in Red Cross War Memorial Children's Hospital (RCWMCH)'s administrative database for primary and secondary discharge diagnoses, and to formulate recommendations for improvement to the current system. METHODS: This study was a retrospective folder review of 450 patient admissions to the short-stay and general paediatric wards at RCWMCH between 1 August 2013 and 1 September 2014. The principal investigator (PI) completed ICD-10 discharge coding for each admission and compared it with the corresponding admission data captured for each patient in the Clinicom (Siemens Medical Solutions, Germany) health information system. Agreement comparison was done to 4- and 3-character ICD-10 code specificity. RESULTS: Of the initial 450 randomly selected folders, 396 (88%) were analysed during the folder review process. The median number of total diagnoses (primary diagnosis plus secondary diagnoses) coded by the PI folder review was 3, with a distribution of 1 - 10 (interquartile range (IQR) 2 - 4). The median number of total diagnoses coded in Clinicom was 1, with a distribution of 1 - 3 (IQR 1 - 1). Agreement of primary diagnosis coding to 4 characters was 26.3%, with slight improvement to 34.3% when assessed to 3 characters. Agreement of secondary diagnoses to 4 characters was 14.9%, and 27.7% when assessed to 3 characters. CONCLUSIONS: Reliability of administrative ICD-10 discharge data from RCWMCH is poor. Inadequacies regarding the employment of dedicated and/or adequately trained coding personnel may significantly contribute to the problem and should be addressed.

Identifying Medicare beneficiaries with dementia.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: No data exist regarding the validity of International Classification of Disease (ICD)-10 dementia diagnoses against a clinician-adjudicated reference standard within Medicare claims data. We examined the accuracy of claims-based diagnoses with respect to expert clinician adjudication using a novel database with individual-level linkages between electronic health record (EHR) and claims. DESIGN: In this retrospective observational study, two neurologists and two psychiatrists performed a standardized review of patients' medical records from January 2016 to December 2018 and adjudicated dementia status. We measured the accuracy of three claims-based definitions of dementia against the reference standard. SETTING: Mass-General-Brigham Healthcare (MGB), Massachusetts, USA. PARTICIPANTS: From an eligible population of 40,690 fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare beneficiaries, aged 65 years and older, within the MGB Accountable Care Organization (ACO), we generated a random sample of 1002 patients, stratified by the pretest likelihood of dementia using administrative surrogates. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS: We evaluated the accuracy (area under receiver operating curve [AUROC]) and calibration (calibration-in-the-large [CITL] and calibration slope) of three ICD-10 claims-based definitions of dementia against clinician-adjudicated standards. We applied inverse probability weighting to reconstruct the eligible population and reported the mean and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for all performance characteristics, using 10-fold cross-validation (CV). RESULTS: Beneficiaries had an average age of 75.3 years and were predominately female (59%) and non-Hispanic whites (93%). The adjudicated prevalence of dementia in the eligible population was 7%. The best-performing definition demonstrated excellent accuracy (CV-AUC 0.94; 95% CI 0.92-0.96) and was well-calibrated to the reference standard of clinician-adjudicated dementia (CV-CITL <0.001, CV-slope 0.97). CONCLUSION: This study is the first to validate ICD-10 diagnostic codes against a robust and replicable approach to dementia ascertainment, using a real-world clinical reference standard. The best performing definition includes diagnostic codes with strong face validity and outperforms an updated version of a previously validated ICD-9 definition of dementia.

DSM-5 pathological personality domains as vulnerability factors in predicting COVID-19-related anxiety symptoms.

Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, individuals worldwide have shown different anxiety-related reactions. Several vulnerability factors may play a role in individuals' psychological reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic. Such factors include pathological personality traits which have been shown to contribute to the development of anxiety-related conditions. Consequently, the present study investigated the relationships between DSM-5 pathological personality domains and COVID-19-related anxiety symptoms. Using an online data portal, the relationships between DSM-5 pathological personality domains and COVID-19-related anxiety symptoms among a mixed university student and community sample (N = 612) were studied. The results showed that there was a positive and significant relationship between all DSM-5 pathological personality domains and COVID-19-related anxiety. The results of multiple linear regression analysis showed that DSM-5 pathological personality domains explained 21% of COVID-19-related anxiety variance. Based on standardized coefficients, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) negative affect domain had the main role in COVID-19-related anxiety. The findings suggest that pathological personality domains can be predictors in the symptoms of anxiety in a viral outbreak. The novel findings add to the literature on individual differences in domains of personality in response to pandemic situations. Implications for future clinical applications and research investigations are discussed.