Accurate classification of carotid endarterectomy indication using physician claims and hospital discharge data
Stephen van Gaal1, Arshia Alimohammadi2, Amy Y X Yu3,4
1Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, 8161-2775 Laurel Street, Vancouver, BC, V5Z1M9, Canada. stephen.vangaal@vch.ca.
Insights
Classifying symptomatic status for carotid endarterectomy (CEA) using administrative data is challenging. Machine learning models incorporating physician claims data significantly improve sensitivity over discharge diagnoses alone.
Area of Science:
- Vascular Surgery
- Health Informatics
- Machine Learning in Healthcare
Background:
- Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) studies require accurate symptomatic status classification.
- Administrative datasets often use hospital discharge codes with uncertain accuracy for this classification.
Purpose of the Study:
- To develop and evaluate algorithms for classifying CEA symptomatic status.
- To improve classification accuracy using hospital discharge and physician claims data.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective cohort study using administrative data from a single center.
- Symptomatic status initially determined by chart review.
- Developed and compared rule-based discharge diagnosis codes with machine learning models (elastic net, random forest) using claims and discharge data.
Main Results:
- Hospital discharge codes showed low sensitivity (32.8%) but high specificity (98.6%) for symptomatic status.
- Machine learning models incorporating physician claims data achieved significantly higher sensitivity (elastic net 69.4%, random forest 78.8%) at the same specificity.
Conclusions:
- Discharge diagnoses alone are insufficient for accurate CEA symptomatic status classification.
- Machine learning algorithms integrating physician claims data offer a more sensitive and specific approach.
- These advanced algorithms represent an improvement over current classification methods.
Background And Purpose:
Studies of carotid endarterectomy (CEA) require stratification by symptomatic vs asymptomatic status because of marked differences in benefits and harms. In administrative datasets, this classification has been done using hospital discharge diagnosis codes of uncertain accuracy. This study aims to develop and evaluate algorithms for classifying symptomatic status using hospital discharge and physician claims data.
Methods:
A single center's administrative database was used to assemble a retrospective cohort of participants with CEA. Symptomatic status was ascertained by chart review prior to linkage with physician claims and hospital discharge data. Accuracy of rule-based classification by discharge diagnosis codes was measured by sensitivity and specificity. Elastic net logistic regression and random forest models combining physician claims and discharge data were generated from the training set and assessed in a test set of final year participants. Models were compared to rule-based classification using sensitivity at fixed specificity.
Results:
We identified 971 participants undergoing CEA at the Vancouver General Hospital (Vancouver, Canada) between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2016. Of these, 729 met inclusion/exclusion criteria (n = 615 training, n = 114 test). Classification of symptomatic status using hospital discharge diagnosis codes was 32.8% (95% CI 29-37%) sensitive and 98.6% specific (96-100%). At matched 98.6% specificity, models that incorporated physician claims data were significantly more sensitive: elastic net 69.4% (59-82%) and random forest 78.8% (69-88%).
Conclusion:
Discharge diagnoses were specific but insensitive for the classification of CEA symptomatic status. Elastic net and random forest machine learning algorithms that included physician claims data were sensitive and specific, and are likely an improvement over current state of classification by discharge diagnosis alone.
More Related Videos
11:58Minimally Invasive Thumb-sized Pterional Craniotomy for Surgical Clip Ligation of Unruptured Anterior Circulation Aneurysms
Published on: August 11, 2015
06:16Signal Acquisition, Score Interpretation, and Economics of a Non-Invasive Point-of-Care Test for Coronary Artery Disease
Published on: August 9, 2024
