Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38586480›Full record

ArticleClinical epidemiology2024

Validation of Diagnostic Codes to Identify Glaucoma in Taiwan's Claims Data: A Multi-Institutional Study.

Pei-Ting Lu, Tsung-Hsien Tsai, Chi-Chun Lai, Lan-Hsin Chuang, Shih-Chieh Shao

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Association between probiotic prescriptions and the incidence of primary open-angle glaucoma in patients with documented dry eye.Graefe's archive for clinical and experimental ophthalmology = Albrecht von Graefes Archiv fur klinische und experimentelle Ophthalmologie · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
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

5 authors.

Pei-Ting LuDepartment of Ophthalmology, Keelung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan.
Tsung-Hsien TsaiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Keelung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan.
Chi-Chun LaiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Keelung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan.
Lan-Hsin ChuangDepartment of Ophthalmology, Keelung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan.
Shih-Chieh ShaoDepartment of Pharmacy, Keelung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan.ORCID 0000-0003-4867-6686

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Healthcare databases play a crucial role in improving our understanding of glaucoma epidemiology, which is the leading cause of irreversible blindness globally. However, the accuracy of diagnostic codes used in these databases to detect glaucoma is still uncertain. Aim: To assess the accuracy of ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM codes in identifying patients with glaucoma, including two distinct subtypes, primary open-angle glaucoma (POAG) and primary angle-closure glaucoma (PACG). Methods: We analyzed electronic medical records data from a 2% random sample of patients who newly underwent visual field examination in Taiwan's largest multi-institutional healthcare system from 2011 to 2020. The diagnosis of glaucoma was confirmed by two ophthalmologists, based on the glaucoma diagnostic criteria. The positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), sensitivity and specificity for ICD-9-CM codes 365.1X and 365.2X, and ICD-10-CM codes H4010X, H4011X, H4012X, H4020X, H4021X, H4022X, H4023X and H4024X for glaucoma were calculated. Results: We randomly selected 821 patients (mean age: 56.9 years old; female: 50.5%) from the original cohort of 41,050 newly receiving visual field examination in the study. Among 464 cases with an ICD-9-CM glaucoma code, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for glaucoma were 86.5, 96.5, 91.9, and 90.9%, respectively. Among 357 cases with an ICD-10-CM glaucoma code, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV for glaucoma were 87.0, 92.8, 92.2 and 87.9%, respectively. The accuracy of diagnostic codes to identify POAG and PACG remained consistent. Conclusion: The diagnostic codes were highly reliable for identifying cases of glaucoma in Taiwan's routine healthcare practice. These results provide confidence when using ICD-9-CM and ICD-10-CM codes to define glaucoma cases in healthcare database research in Taiwan.

Indexed as

chang gung research databasedatabase researchICD-10-CM codesICD-9-CM codesprimary angle closure glaucomaprimary open angle glaucomavalidation

Identifiers

PMID38586480
PMCPMC10999195

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.