Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 15, 2026

Author Spotlight: Self-Assessment Protocol for Predicting Psoriatic Arthritis in Psoriasis Patients
Published on: March 1, 2024
Accuracy of Diagnostic Codes and Algorithms Used to Identify Rheumatoid Arthritis and Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis
Constanza Saka-Herrán1, Jessica Bennett1, Yara Alkabti2
1School of Pharmacy and Biomolecular Sciences, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, Dublin, Ireland.
Objective:
This systematic review aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of algorithms used to identify rheumatoid arthritis and juvenile idiopathic arthritis in electronic health records.
Methods:
We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials databases and included studies that validated case definitions against a reference standard, such as rheumatologist-confirmed diagnosis or American College of Rheumatology/EULAR classification criteria. Title and abstract screening, full-text review, data extraction, and quality assessment were all completed in duplicate. Results were synthesized narratively and using a bivariate random-effects meta-analysis of sensitivity and specificity.
Results:
A total of 35 studies were included. Algorithms varied widely in complexity, ranging from single International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes to combinations including disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), hospitalization records, and specialist diagnosis. Algorithms combining ICD codes with DMARD prescriptions (pooled sensitivity 0.79 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61-0.90], specificity 0.96 [95% CI 0.72-1.00], positive predictive value [PPV] 0.78 [95% CI 0.63-0.88]) or requiring an ICD code assigned by a rheumatologist (pooled sensitivity 0.91 [95% CI 0.70-0.98], specificity 0.94 [95% CI 0.49-1.00], PPV 0.70 [95% CI 0.64-0.75]) showed the highest accuracy, with balanced sensitivity, specificity, and PPV. Less restrictive algorithms demonstrated high sensitivity but lower PPV. Substantial heterogeneity was observed across studies, likely due to differences in algorithm structure, data sources, and validation methods. Despite this variability, we used conceptually coherent categories to allow for meaningful synthesis, prioritizing clinical interpretability.
Conclusions:
These findings support the use of more specific algorithms when diagnostic certainty is essential and highlight the need for further validation of high-performing algorithms across diverse health care systems.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Genome-wide Association Studies-GWAS
GWAS does not require the identification of the target gene involved in...
Rheumatic Heart Disease II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
The JAK-STAT Signaling Pathway
Rheumatic Heart Disease III: Medical Management
Documentation of Nursing Diagnosis
In some settings, data-driven computerized decision support systems are in place, allowing for more accurate nursing diagnoses. The database within one of these systems includes diagnostic labels defining characteristics, activities, and indicators for nursing. A nurse enters...
Methods of Documentation VII: EMR

