ArticleJAMIA open2023
Enhanced phenotypes for identifying opioid overdose in emergency department visit electronic health record data.
Article in JAMIA open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Sensitivity and specificity of International Classification of Diseases algorithms (ICD-9 and ICD-10) used to identify opioid-related overdose cases: A systematic review and an example of estimation using Bayesian latent class models in the absence of gold standards.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2024Pooled it
- Development and Validation of Natural Language Processing Algorithms in the ENACT National Electronic Health Record Research Network.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Development and validation of natural language processing algorithms in the national ENACT network.Journal of clinical and translational science · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Accurate identification of opioid overdose (OOD) cases in electronic healthcare record (EHR) data is an important element in surveillance, empirical research, and clinical intervention. We sought to improve existing OOD electronic phenotypes by incorporating new data types beyond diagnostic codes and by applying several statistical and machine learning methods. Materials and Methods: We developed an EHR dataset of emergency department visits involving OOD cases or patients considered at risk for an OOD and ascertained true OOD status through manual chart reviews. We developed and validated prediction models using Random Forest, Extreme Gradient Boost, and Elastic Net models that incorporated 717 features involving primary and second diagnoses, chief complaints, medications prescribed, vital signs, laboratory results, and procedural codes. We also developed models limited to single data types. Results: A total of 1718 records involving 1485 patients were manually reviewed; 541 (36.4%) patients had one or more OOD. Prediction performance was similar for all models; sensitivity varied from 94% to 97%; and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 98% for all methods. The primary diagnosis and chief complaint were the most important contributors to AUC performance; primary diagnoses and medication class contributed most to sensitivity; chief complaint, primary diagnosis, and vital signs were most important for specificity. Models limited to decision support data types available in real time demonstrated robust prediction performance. Conclusions: Substantial prediction performance improvements were demonstrated for identifying OODs in EHR data. Our e-phenotypes could be applied in surveillance, retrospective empirical applications, or clinical decision support systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.