Evaluating an ICD-10 Based Proxy for Date of Birth in Electronic Health Record Data.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Pub Date : 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1002/pds.70083
Sara Burns, Ariel Mueller, Matthew Smith, Timothy Houle, Michaela K Farber, Tanzeema Hossain, Justin Manjourides
{"title":"Evaluating an ICD-10 Based Proxy for Date of Birth in Electronic Health Record Data.","authors":"Sara Burns, Ariel Mueller, Matthew Smith, Timothy Houle, Michaela K Farber, Tanzeema Hossain, Justin Manjourides","doi":"10.1002/pds.70083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To comply with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) Privacy Rule, many real-world data providers mask a patient's date of birth by supplying only year of birth to data users. The lack of granularity around patient age is a challenge when using RWD, especially for pediatric research studies. In this study, a proxy for patient date of birth is evaluated using electronic health record (EHR) data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This validation study leverages a retrospective cohort of EHR data from Mass General Brigham (MGB) patients born between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2022, to assess the use of the date of a patient's first observed International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) day-of birth code (Z37* or Z38*) as a proxy for date of birth. Alternative proxy measures such as date of first other infancy-related ICD-10-CM code and date of first clinical activity were also assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 82 398 patients born during the five-year study period, 58 047 (70.4%) had an ICD-10-CM birth code and were included in the primary analysis. The mean difference between true date of birth and first observed birth code was 0.3 days with a standard deviation of 15.0 days. The first observed birth code occurred within 30 days of the true date of birth in 99.9% of cases.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Results from this study suggest that the date of the first day-of ICD-10-CM birth code can be used as a proxy for true patient date of birth in pediatric RWD studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 1","pages":"e70083"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70083","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To comply with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) Privacy Rule, many real-world data providers mask a patient's date of birth by supplying only year of birth to data users. The lack of granularity around patient age is a challenge when using RWD, especially for pediatric research studies. In this study, a proxy for patient date of birth is evaluated using electronic health record (EHR) data.

Methods: This validation study leverages a retrospective cohort of EHR data from Mass General Brigham (MGB) patients born between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2022, to assess the use of the date of a patient's first observed International Classification of Diseases 10th Revision Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) day-of birth code (Z37* or Z38*) as a proxy for date of birth. Alternative proxy measures such as date of first other infancy-related ICD-10-CM code and date of first clinical activity were also assessed.

Results: Of 82 398 patients born during the five-year study period, 58 047 (70.4%) had an ICD-10-CM birth code and were included in the primary analysis. The mean difference between true date of birth and first observed birth code was 0.3 days with a standard deviation of 15.0 days. The first observed birth code occurred within 30 days of the true date of birth in 99.9% of cases.

Conclusion: Results from this study suggest that the date of the first day-of ICD-10-CM birth code can be used as a proxy for true patient date of birth in pediatric RWD studies.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评估电子健康记录数据中基于ICD-10的出生日期代理。
目的:为了遵守1996年《健康保险流通与责任法案》(HIPAA)隐私规则,许多现实世界的数据提供商通过仅向数据用户提供出生年份来掩盖患者的出生日期。在使用RWD时,缺乏患者年龄的粒度是一个挑战,特别是在儿科研究中。在本研究中,使用电子健康记录(EHR)数据评估患者出生日期的代理。方法:本验证研究利用2018年1月1日至2022年12月31日期间出生的麻省总医院(MGB)患者的EHR数据的回顾性队列,以评估患者首次观察到的国际疾病分类第10版临床修改(ICD-10-CM)出生日期代码(Z37*或Z38*)的日期作为出生日期的代理。还评估了其他替代替代措施,如首次其他与婴儿相关的ICD-10-CM代码日期和首次临床活动日期。结果:在5年研究期间出生的82 398例患者中,58 047例(70.4%)具有ICD-10-CM出生代码,并被纳入主要分析。真实出生日期与首次观察到的出生代码的平均差异为0.3天,标准差为15.0天。在99.9%的病例中,首次观察到的出生代码发生在真实出生日期的30天内。结论:本研究结果提示,在儿科RWD研究中,ICD-10-CM出生代码的第一天日期可以作为患者真实出生日期的代表。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
173
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report. Particular areas of interest include: design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology; comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world; methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology; assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy; patterns of drug utilization; relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines; evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.
期刊最新文献
Impact of Lookback Duration on the Performance of a Claims-Based Frailty Proxy in Women With Stage I-III Breast Cancer. Impact of Pharmacovigilance Interventions Targeting Fluoroquinolones on Antibiotic Use in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. Successful Linkage of Electronic Medical Records and National Health Data System in Type 2 Diabetes Research: Methodological Insights and Implications. Use of Potentially Nephrotoxic Drugs in Type 2 Diabetes Patients on SGLT2i: A Trajectories Analysis. Lessons Learned From Characterizing Long COVID Among US Medicare Beneficiaries.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1