Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27135409›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Defining Disease Phenotypes in Primary Care Electronic Health Records by a Machine Learning Approach: A Case Study in Identifying Rheumatoid Arthritis.

Shang-Ming Zhou, Fabiola Fernandez-Gutierrez, Jonathan Kennedy, Roxanne Cooksey, Mark Atkinson, Spiros Denaxas, Stefan Siebert, William G Dixon, Terence W O'Neill, Ernest Choy and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Management of Rheumatoid Arthritis in Primary Care: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

13 authors.

Shang-Ming ZhouInstitute of Life Science, College of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom.
Fabiola Fernandez-GutierrezInstitute of Life Science, College of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom.
Jonathan KennedyInstitute of Life Science, College of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom.
Roxanne CookseyInstitute of Life Science, College of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom.
Mark AtkinsonInstitute of Life Science, College of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom.
Spiros DenaxasUCL Institute of Health Informatics and Farr Institute of Health Informatics Research, London, United Kingdom.
Stefan SiebertInstitute of Infection, Immunity and Inflammation, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
William G DixonArthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Institute of Inflammation and Repair, Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Terence W O'NeillArthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Institute of Inflammation and Repair, Faculty of Medical and Human Sciences, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Ernest ChoyArthritis Research UK CREATE Centre and Welsh Arthritis Research Network, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.
Cathie SudlowCentre for Clinical Brain Sciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.
UK Biobank Follow-up and Outcomes Group
Sinead BrophyInstitute of Life Science, College of Medicine, Swansea University, Swansea, United Kingdom.

Funding

British Heart FoundationCancer Research UKChief Scientist OfficeMedical Research Council G0902272Medical Research Council MC_PC_13042Medical Research Council MC_PC_13043Medical Research Council MC_QA137853Medical Research Council MC_U137686860Medical Research Council MR/K006525/1Medical Research Council MR/K006584/1Medical Research Council MR/K006665/1Medical Research Council MR/K023233/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectives1) To use data-driven method to examine clinical codes (risk factors) of a medical condition in primary care electronic health records (EHRs) that can accurately predict a diagnosis of the condition in secondary care EHRs. 2) To develop and validate a disease phenotyping algorithm for rheumatoid arthritis using primary care EHRs.

methodsThis study linked routine primary and secondary care EHRs in Wales, UK. A machine learning based scheme was used to identify patients with rheumatoid arthritis from primary care EHRs via the following steps: i) selection of variables by comparing relative frequencies of Read codes in the primary care dataset associated with disease case compared to non-disease control (disease/non-disease based on the secondary care diagnosis); ii) reduction of predictors/associated variables using a Random Forest method, iii) induction of decision rules from decision tree model. The proposed method was then extensively validated on an independent dataset, and compared for performance with two existing deterministic algorithms for RA which had been developed using expert clinical knowledge.

resultsPrimary care EHRs were available for 2,238,360 patients over the age of 16 and of these 20,667 were also linked in the secondary care rheumatology clinical system. In the linked dataset, 900 predictors (out of a total of 43,100 variables) in the primary care record were discovered more frequently in those with versus those without RA. These variables were reduced to 37 groups of related clinical codes, which were used to develop a decision tree model. The final algorithm identified 8 predictors related to diagnostic codes for RA, medication codes, such as those for disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, and absence of alternative diagnoses such as psoriatic arthritis. The proposed data-driven method performed as well as the expert clinical knowledge based methods.

conclusionData-driven scheme, such as ensemble machine learning methods, has the potential of identifying the most informative predictors in a cost-effective and rapid way to accurately and reliably classify rheumatoid arthritis or other complex medical conditions in primary care EHRs.

Indexed as

Electronic Health RecordsMachine LearningAlgorithmsAntirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidHumansPrimary Health CareAntirheumatic Agents

Identifiers

PMID27135409
PMCPMC4852928

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.