| Sumario: | • To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to create an EHR-based JIA cohort using ICD codes, keywords, and exclusion criteria. • Three studied algorithms achieved PPVs of 97%, each with different algorithm criteria, allowing for users to select an algorithm to best fit their research needs. • This methodology allows for an efficient, cost-effective way to assemble a cohort of JIA patients at a single institution or at multiple institutions. The objective of this study was to develop an algorithm that accurately identifies juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) patients in the electronic health record (EHR). Algorithms were developed in a de-identified EHR by searching for a priori JIA ICD-9 (International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision) and ICD-10-CM (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification) codes and JIA-related keywords. Exclusion criteria were selected to remove other autoimmune diseases. A training set of 200 patients was randomly selected from patients containing ≥1 occurrence of a JIA ICD-9 or ICD-10-CM code. Case status was determined by a rheumatology clinic note documenting a JIA diagnosis before age 20. For each algorithm, positive predictive value (PPV), sensitivity, and F-measure were determined using the training set. We developed 103 algorithms using combinations of ICD codes, keywords, and exclusion criteria. The algorithm requiring 4 or more counts of JIA ICD-9 or ICD-10-CM codes, keywords "enthesitis" and "uveitis", and exclusion of ICD-9 or ICD-10-CM codes for systemic lupus erythematosus, dermatomyositis, polymyositis, and dermatopolymyositis had the highest PPV of 97% in the training set with an F-measure of 87%. There were 1,131 JIA cases returned by this algorithm. We validated the highest performing algorithm in a separate cohort from the training set with a PPV of 92% and an F-measure of 75%. We developed and validated JIA EHR algorithms with ICD-9 and ICD-10-CM codes to accurately identify a JIA cohort. Three algorithms achieved PPVs of 97%, each with different algorithm criteria, allowing for users to select an algorithm to best fit their research needs.
|
|---|