Cited by 19Medical Coding and Health InformationGlaucoma and retinal disordersOphthalmology and Visual Health Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Validity of International Classification of Diseases Codes for Identifying Neuro-Ophthalmic Disease in Large Data Sets: A Systematic Review

Open access
Hamedani, Ali G., De Lott, Lindsey B., Deveney, Tatiana, Moss, Heather E.·2020·Journal of Neuro-Ophthalmology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Administrative health claims data have been used for research in neuro-ophthalmology, but the validity of International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes for identifying neuro-ophthalmic conditions is unclear. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We performed a systematic literature review to assess the validity of administrative claims data for identifying patients with neuro-ophthalmic disorders. Two reviewers independently reviewed all eligible full-length articles and used a standardized abstraction form to identify ICD code-based definitions for 9 neuro-ophthalmic conditions and their sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). A quality assessment of eligible studies was also performed. RESULTS: Eleven articles that met criteria for inclusion are as follows: 3 studies of idiopathic intracranial hypertension (PPV 54%-91% and NPV 74%-85%), 2 studies of giant cell arteritis (sensitivity 30%-96% and PPV 94%), 3 studies of optic neuritis (sensitivity 76%-99%, specificity 83%-100%, PPV 25%-100%, and NPV 98%-100%), 1 study of neuromyelitis optica (sensitivity 60%, specificity 100%, PPV 43%-100%, and NPV 98%-100%), 1 study of ocular motor cranial neuropathies (PPV 98%-99%), and 2 studies of myasthenia gravis (sensitivity 53%-97%, specificity 99%-100%, PPV 5%-90%, and NPV 100%). No studies met eligibility criteria for nonarteritic ischemic optic neuropathy, thyroid eye disease, and blepharospasm. Approximately 45.5% provided only one measure of diagnostic accuracy. Complete information about the validation cohorts, inclusion/exclusion criteria, data collection methods, and expertise of those reviewing charts for diagnostic accuracy was missing in 90.9%, 72.7%, 81.8%, and 36.4% of studies, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Few studies have reported the validity of ICD codes for neuro-ophthalmic conditions. The range of diagnostic accuracy for some disorders and study quality varied widely. This should be taken into consideration when interpreting studies of neuro-ophthalmic conditions using administrative claims data.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/wno.0000000000000971

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 27

  1. Moss, 2019, Big data research in neuro-ophthalmology: promises and pitfalls, J Neuroophthalmol., 39, 480, 10.1097/WNO.0000000000000751 · DOI
  2. Sodhi, 2017, Oral fluoroquinolones and risk of secondary pseudotumor cerebri syndrome: nested case-control study, Neurology., 89, 792, 10.1212/WNL.0000000000004247 · DOI
  3. Rubin, 2017, Ischemic optic neuropathy in cardiac surgery: incidence and risk factors in the United States from the national inpatient sample 1998 to 2013, Anesthesiology., 126, 810, 10.1097/ALN.0000000000001533 · DOI
  4. Rubin, 2016, Perioperative visual loss in spine fusion surgery: ischemic optic neuropathy in the United States from 1998 to 2012 in the nationwide inpatient sample, Anesthesiology., 125, 457, 10.1097/ALN.0000000000001211 · DOI
  5. Lee, 2011, Incidence of nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy: increased risk among diabetic patients, Ophthalmology., 118, 959, 10.1016/j.ophtha.2011.01.054 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Lee, 2016, Increased risk of stroke in patients with nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy: a nationwide retrospective cohort study, Am J Ophthalmol., 170, 183, 10.1016/j.ajo.2016.08.006 · DOI
  7. Guo, 2018, Prevalence and incidence of optic neuritis in patients with different types of uveitis, Ophthalmic Epidemiol., 25, 39, 10.1080/09286586.2017.1339808 · DOI
  8. Stein, 2015, Risk factors for developing thyroid-associated ophthalmopathy among individuals with Graves disease, JAMA Ophthalmol., 133, 290, 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2014.5103 · DOI
  9. Fisayo, 2016, Overdiagnosis of idiopathic intracranial hypertension, Neurology., 86, 341, 10.1212/WNL.0000000000002318 · DOI
  10. Stunkel, 2018, Incidence and causes of overdiagnosis of optic neuritis, JAMA Ophthalmol., 136, 76, 10.1001/jamaophthalmol.2017.5470 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Moher, 2009, Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement, Ann Intern Med., 151, 264, 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 · DOI · Paper page
  12. St Germaine-Smith, 2012, Recommendations for optimal ICD codes to study neurologic conditions: a systematic review, Neurology., 79, 1049, 10.1212/WNL.0b013e3182684707 · DOI · Paper page
  13. Khokhar, 2016, Systematic review of validated case definitions for diabetes in ICD-9-coded and ICD-10-coded data in adult populations, BMJ Open., 6, e009952, 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009952 · DOI
  14. Jolley, 2015, Validity of administrative data in recording sepsis: a systematic review, Crit Care Lond Engl., 19, 139, 10.1186/s13054-015-0847-3 · DOI
  15. Koerner, 2014, Inpatient and emergency service utilization in patients with idiopathic intracranial hypertension, J Neuroophthalmol., 34, 229, 10.1097/WNO.0000000000000073 · DOI
  16. Sundholm, 2017, Population-based incidence and clinical characteristics of idiopathic intracranial hypertension, Acta Neurol Scand., 136, 427, 10.1111/ane.12742 · DOI
  17. Sundholm, 2018, Improving identification of idiopathic intracranial hypertension patients in Swedish patient register, Acta Neurol Scand., 137, 341, 10.1111/ane.12876 · DOI
  18. Caudrelier, 2019, Validation of giant cell arteritis diagnosis code in the French hospital electronic database, Eur J Intern Med., 60, e16, 10.1016/j.ejim.2018.10.004 · DOI
  19. Michet, 2015, The detection of rheumatic disease through hospital diagnoses with examples of rheumatoid arthritis and giant cell arteritis: what are we missing?, J Rheumatol., 42, 2071, 10.3899/jrheum.150186 · DOI
  20. Boesen, 2018, Pediatric acquired demyelinating syndromes: a nationwide validation study of the Danish national patient register, Clin Epidemiol., 10, 391, 10.2147/CLEP.S156997 · DOI
  21. Marrie, 2018, Identifying optic neuritis and transverse myelitis using administrative data, Mult Scler Relat Disord., 25, 258, 10.1016/j.msard.2018.08.013 · DOI
  22. Winthrop, 2013, Initiation of anti-TNF therapy and the risk of optic neuritis: from the safety assessment of biologic ThERapy (SABER) Study, Am J Ophthalmol., 155, 183, 10.1016/j.ajo.2012.06.023 · DOI
  23. Wingerchuk, 2015, International consensus diagnostic criteria for neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorders, Neurology., 85, 177, 10.1212/WNL.0000000000001729 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Yang, 2016, Migraine and risk of ocular motor cranial nerve palsies: a nationwide cohort study, Ophthalmology., 123, 191, 10.1016/j.ophtha.2015.09.003 · DOI
  25. Breiner, 2015, Canadian administrative health data can identify patients with myasthenia gravis, Neuroepidemiology., 44, 108, 10.1159/000375463 · DOI
  26. Wright, 2011, A method and knowledge base for automated inference of patient problems from structured data in an electronic medical record, J Am Med Inform Assoc., 18, 859, 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000121 · DOI
  27. Meer, 2019, Adherence to clinical trial supported evaluation of optic neuritis, Ophthalmic Epidemiol., 26, 321, 10.1080/09286586.2019.1621352 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 19

Metadata

Authors
Hamedani, A. G., De Lott, L. B., Deveney, T., & Moss, H. E.
Affiliations
University of Michigan (US)
Corresponding author
Hamedani, Ali G.
Venue
Journal of Neuro-Ophthalmology
Published
2020-06-19
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
514-519
ISSN
1070-8022 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3037672351
Cited by
19
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 3
FWCI
0.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Neuro-Ophthalmology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Eye Institute (K23EY027849, P30EY026877)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (T32NS061779)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Medical Coding and Health Information
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Glaucoma and retinal disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Ophthalmology › Ophthalmology and Visual Health Research
Keywords
ICD codes, neuro-ophthalmic disorders, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity, idiopathic intracranial hypertension, giant cell arteritis, optic neuritis, neuromyelitis optica, myasthenia gravis, nonarteritic anterior ischemic optic neuropathy, Graves' ophthalmopathy, blepharospasm
MeSH terms
Eye Diseases, Humans, Neurology, Ophthalmology, Databases, Factual

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review