Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 20, 2026

Comparing Objective Conjunctival Hyperemia Grading and the Ocular Surface Disease Index Score in Dry Eye Syndrome During COVID-19
Published on: May 25, 2022
Algorithms for the identification of ophthalmic diseases in medico-administrative databases: A systematic review
Julie Neau1, Agathe Turpin1, Deivanes Rajendrabose2
1Sorbonne Université, INSERM, Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique, AP-HP, Hôpital Pitié-Salpêtrière, Département de Santé Publique, Centre de Pharmacoépidémiologie de l'AP-HP (Cephepi), Paris, France.
Context:
Medico-administrative databases (MADs) are increasingly used in comparative effectiveness research.
Objective:
To conduct a systematic review of algorithms used for the identification of key ophthalmic diseases in MADs: age-related macular degeneration (AMD), diabetic retinopathy (DR)/ diabetic macular edema (DME), glaucoma, cataract and uveitis.
Methods:
We searched PubMed between June 30, 2016, and August 6, 2024, using keywords related to MADs and the ophthalmic diseases of interest. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data.
Results:
From the 1719 references identified, 315 were selected describing a total of 523 algorithms. Approximately half of the study objectives were related to the identification of factors associated with the onset of ophthalmic diseases, exacerbation, or hospitalization (48%, n = 151). Only 2% (n = 6) focused exclusively on the development and/or validation of algorithms. Most studies were from Taiwan (36%, n = 113), Korea (27%, n = 84) and the United States (20%, n = 64). From the 523 algorithms, a validation was mentioned for 47 (9%). After regrouping close algorithms, 433 different algorithms were identified concerning glaucoma (34%, n = 146), DR/DME (26%, n = 114), AMD (18%, n = 80), cataract (11%, n = 47) and uveitis (11%, n = 46). About half of these algorithms used diagnosis codes only (58%, n = 251), while others combined diagnosis codes and procedures (16%, n = 69), or diagnosis codes and drugs (12%, n = 50).
Conclusion:
This systematic review showed heterogeneity between algorithms used to identify the same pathology, raising the question of which ones are more appropriate to use in a particular context. Moreover, most algorithms were not validated despite the potential impact on study results.
Related Concept Videos
Glaucoma: Overview
Ophthalmic Drug Delivery Systems