Administrative Coding in Electronic Health Care Record-Based Research of NAFLD: An Expert Panel Consensus Statement.
Administrative Coding in Electronic Health Care Record-Based Research of NAFLD: An Expert Panel Consensus Statement.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/hep.31726
复制
发表时间：
2021-07
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Åberg F
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hagström H;Adams LA;Allen AM;Byrne CD;Chang Y;Grønbaek H;Ismail M;Jepsen P;Kanwal F;Kramer J;Lazarus JV;Long MT;Loomba R;Newsome PN;Rowe IA;Ryu S;Schattenberg JM;Serper M;Sheron N;Simon TG;Tapper EB;Wild S;Wong VW;Yilmaz Y;Zelber-Sagi S;Åberg F
基于电子健康记录(EHR)的研究允许捕获大量数据，这对于非酒精性脂肪性肝病(NAFLD)是必要的，因为临床肝脏结果的风险通常较低。对于哪些国际疾病分类(ICD)代码应该被用作暴露和结果，缺乏共识限制了研究结果的可比性和概括性。我们的目标是在一个可以成为参考标准的ICD代码专家小组中达成共识，并就共同的方法问题提供指导。对基于EHR的NAFLD研究感兴趣的研究人员被邀请共同定义哪些行政代码最适合记录暴露和结果。我们使用改进的德尔福方法，就该领域中常见的几个方法学挑战达成共识。经过两轮修订，在所有审议的项目上达成了很高水平的一致(>；67%)。在以电子健康记录为基础的NAFLD研究中定义暴露和结果时，将考虑纳入和排除标准的行政法规综合清单达成了充分共识。我们还就如何处理常见的方法学问题和确定未来研究的领域提出了建议。这一专家小组共识声明有助于协调和提高基于EHR的NAFLD研究的概括性。
Electronic health record (EHR)-based research allows the capture of large amounts of data, which is necessary in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), where the risk of clinical liver outcomes is generally low. The lack of consensus on which International Classification of Disease (ICD) codes should be used as exposures and outcomes limits comparability and generalizability of results across studies. We aimed to establish consensus among a panel of experts on ICD codes that could become the reference standard and provide guidance around common methodological issues. Researchers with an interest in EHR-based NAFLD research were invited to collectively define which administrative codes are most appropriate for documenting exposures and outcomes. We used a modified Delphi approach to reach consensus on several commonly encountered methodological challenges in the field. After two rounds of revision, a high level of agreement (>67%) was reached on all items considered. Full consensus was achieved on a comprehensive list of administrative codes to be considered for inclusion and exclusion criteria in defining exposures and outcomes in EHR-based NAFLD research. We also provide suggestions on how to approach commonly encountered methodological issues and identify areas for future research. This expert panel consensus statement can help harmonize and improve generalizability of EHR-based NAFLD research.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
29.4
作者：
Kanwal F;Kramer JR;Mapakshi S;Natarajan Y;Chayanupatkul M;Richardson PA;Li L;Desiderio R;Thrift AP;Asch SM;Chu J;El-Serag HB
通讯作者：
El-Serag HB
影响因子：
24.5
作者：
Feldstein AE;Charatcharoenwitthaya P;Treeprasertsuk S;Benson JT;Enders FB;Angulo P
通讯作者：
Angulo P
影响因子：
6
作者：
Kaps, Leonard;Labenz, Christian;Schattenberg, Joern M.
通讯作者：
Schattenberg, Joern M.
影响因子：
3.1
作者：
Corey, Kathleen E.;Kartoun, Uri;Shaw, Stanley Y.
通讯作者：
Shaw, Stanley Y.
影响因子：
2.9
作者：
Driver, Robert J.;Balachandrakumar, Vinay;Rowe, Ian A.
通讯作者：
Rowe, Ian A.