Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38911332›Full record

ArticleJAMIA open2024

Using machine learning to improve anaphylaxis case identification in medical claims data.

Kamil Can Kural, Ilya Mazo, Mark Walderhaug, Luis Santana-Quintero, Konstantinos Karagiannis, Elaine E Thompson, Jeffrey A Kelman, Ravi Goud

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in JAMIA open, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Preparing Allergists to Practice in 2050 Using Artificial Intelligence.The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. In practice · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Kamil Can KuralCenter for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, United States.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1661-4616
Ilya MazoCenter for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, United States.
Mark WalderhaugCenter for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, United States.
Luis Santana-QuinteroCenter for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, United States.
Konstantinos KaragiannisCenter for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, United States.
Elaine E ThompsonCenter for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, United States.
Jeffrey A KelmanCenters for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Washington, DC 20001, United States.
Ravi GoudCenter for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, MD 20993, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objectives: Anaphylaxis is a severe life-threatening allergic reaction, and its accurate identification in healthcare databases can harness the potential of "Big Data" for healthcare or public health purposes. Materials and methods: This study used claims data obtained between October 1, 2015 and February 28, 2019 from the CMS database to examine the utility of machine learning in identifying incident anaphylaxis cases. We created a feature selection pipeline to identify critical features between different datasets. Then a variety of unsupervised and supervised methods were used (eg, Sammon mapping and eXtreme Gradient Boosting) to train models on datasets of differing data quality, which reflects the varying availability and potential rarity of ground truth data in medical databases. Results: Resulting machine learning model accuracies ranged from 47.7% to 94.4% when tested on ground truth data. Finally, we found new features to help experts enhance existing case-finding algorithms. Discussion: Developing precise algorithms to detect medical outcomes in claims can be a laborious and expensive process, particularly for conditions presented and coded diversely. We found it beneficial to filter out highly potent codes used for data curation to identify underlying patterns and features. To improve rule-based algorithms where necessary, researchers could use model explainers to determine noteworthy features, which could then be shared with experts and included in the algorithm. Conclusion: Our work suggests machine learning models can perform at similar levels as a previously published expert case-finding algorithm, while also having the potential to improve performance or streamline algorithm construction processes by identifying new relevant features for algorithm construction.

Indexed as

allergyanaphylaxisCenters for Medicare & Medicaid Serviceselectronic health recordsmachine learningpublic health

Identifiers

PMID38911332
PMCPMC11190610

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.