Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37654015›Full record

ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2024

Improving the accuracy of automated gout flare ascertainment using natural language processing of electronic health records and linked Medicare claims data.

Kazuki Yoshida, Tianrun Cai, Lily G Bessette, Erin Kim, Su Been Lee, Luke E Zabotka, Alec Sun, Julianna M Mastrorilli, Theresa A Oduol, Jun Liu and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

14 authors.

Kazuki YoshidaDivision of Rheumatology, Inflammation, and Immunity, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2030-3549
Tianrun CaiDivision of Rheumatology, Inflammation, and Immunity, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Lily G BessetteDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Erin KimDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Su Been LeeDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Luke E ZabotkaDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Alec SunDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Julianna M MastrorilliDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Theresa A OduolDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Jun LiuDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Daniel H SolomonDivision of Rheumatology, Inflammation, and Immunity, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8202-5428
Seoyoung C KimDivision of Rheumatology, Inflammation, and Immunity, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Rishi J DesaiDepartment of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Katherine P LiaoDivision of Rheumatology, Inflammation, and Immunity, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Funding

VERITY: Value and Evidence in Rheumatology using bioInformaTics, and advanced analYticsP30AR072577 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI Daniel Hal Solomon · 2017 to 2026
$9.8M
Comparative Effectiveness of Treat-To-Target Approach versus Routine Care in Management of GoutR01AR073314 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI KIM, SEOYOUNG CATHERINE · 2019 to 2021
$1.3M
Gout and Cardiovascular Comorbidities: Disentangling the Interplay with Advanced Methods to Address Measurement IssuesK23AR076453 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI YOSHIDA, KAZUKI · 2020 to 2022
$439k
Causal Inference for Better Understanding Clinical Trials Results: Reconciling Discrepant Comparative Evidence from Two Major Cardiovascular Safety Trials of Urate-Lowering TherapyR03AR081309 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI TEDESCHI, SARA K. · 2022 to 2023
$179k
NIAMS NIH HHS K23 AR076453NIAMS NIH HHS P30 AR072577NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR073314NIAMS NIH HHS R03 AR081309
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe aimed to determine whether integrating concepts from the notes from the electronic health record (EHR) data using natural language processing (NLP) could improve the identification of gout flares.

methodsUsing Medicare claims linked with EHR, we selected gout patients who initiated the urate-lowering therapy (ULT). Patients' 12-month baseline period and on-treatment follow-up were segmented into 1-month units. We retrieved EHR notes for months with gout diagnosis codes and processed notes for NLP concepts. We selected a random sample of 500 patients and reviewed each of their notes for the presence of a physician-documented gout flare. Months containing at least 1 note mentioning gout flares were considered months with events. We used 60% of patients to train predictive models with LASSO. We evaluated the models by the area under the curve (AUC) in the validation data and examined positive/negative predictive values (P/NPV).

resultsWe extracted and labeled 839 months of follow-up (280 with gout flares). The claims-only model selected 20 variables (AUC = 0.69). The NLP concept-only model selected 15 (AUC = 0.69). The combined model selected 32 claims variables and 13 NLP concepts (AUC = 0.73). The claims-only model had a PPV of 0.64 [0.50, 0.77] and an NPV of 0.71 [0.65, 0.76], whereas the combined model had a PPV of 0.76 [0.61, 0.88] and an NPV of 0.71 [0.65, 0.76].

conclusionAdding NLP concept variables to claims variables resulted in a small improvement in the identification of gout flares. Our data-driven claims-only model and our combined claims/NLP-concept model outperformed existing rule-based claims algorithms reliant on medication use, diagnosis, and procedure codes.

Indexed as

GoutAgedAlgorithmsElectronic Health RecordsHumansMedicareNatural Language ProcessingSymptom Flare UpUnited Statesgoutnatural language processing

Identifiers

PMID37654015
PMCPMC10873073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.