Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24166724›Full record

ArticleJournal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA2013

Billing code algorithms to identify cases of peripheral artery disease from administrative data.

Jin Fan, Adelaide M Arruda-Olson, Cynthia L Leibson, Carin Smith, Guanghui Liu, Kent R Bailey, Iftikhar J Kullo

Abstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 70 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
70citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

70 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Blood Pressure and Risk of Clinical Events in Peripheral Artery Disease.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

10 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Jin FanGeriatric Cardiovascular Department, Chinese PLA General Hospital, Beijing, China.
Adelaide M Arruda-Olson
Cynthia L Leibson
Carin Smith
Guanghui Liu
Kent R Bailey
Iftikhar J Kullo

Funding

Genomic Basis of Susceptibility to COVID-19 Infection and its ComplicationsU01HG006379 · NHGRI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI Richard R. Sharp · 2011 to 2026
$16.5M
Rochester Epidemiology ProjectR01AG034676 · NIA · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI ROCCA, WALTER A, ST SAUVER, JENNIFER LYNN · 2010 to 2019
$9.5M
NHGRI NIH HHS HG06379NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG006379NIA NIH HHS R01 AG034676NIA NIH HHS R01AG034676
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo construct and validate billing code algorithms for identifying patients with peripheral arterial disease (PAD).

methodsWe extracted all encounters and line item details including PAD-related billing codes at Mayo Clinic Rochester, Minnesota, between July 1, 1997 and June 30, 2008; 22 712 patients evaluated in the vascular laboratory were divided into training and validation sets. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to create an integer code score from the training dataset, and this was tested in the validation set. We applied a model-based code algorithm to patients evaluated in the vascular laboratory and compared this with a simpler algorithm (presence of at least one of the ICD-9 PAD codes 440.20-440.29). We also applied both algorithms to a community-based sample (n=4420), followed by a manual review.

resultsThe logistic regression model performed well in both training and validation datasets (c statistic=0.91). In patients evaluated in the vascular laboratory, the model-based code algorithm provided better negative predictive value. The simpler algorithm was reasonably accurate for identification of PAD status, with lesser sensitivity and greater specificity. In the community-based sample, the sensitivity (38.7% vs 68.0%) of the simpler algorithm was much lower, whereas the specificity (92.0% vs 87.6%) was higher than the model-based algorithm.

conclusionsA model-based billing code algorithm had reasonable accuracy in identifying PAD cases from the community, and in patients referred to the non-invasive vascular laboratory. The simpler algorithm had reasonable accuracy for identification of PAD in patients referred to the vascular laboratory but was significantly less sensitive in a community-based sample.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsClinical CodingElectronic Health RecordsHospital ChargesHumansInsurance Claim ReportingInternational Classification of DiseasesLogistic ModelsPeripheral Arterial DiseaseROC Curvebilling codeselectronic medical recordinformaticsperipheral artery disease

Identifiers

PMID24166724
PMCPMC3861931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.