ArticleCurrent medical research and opinion2025
The validity of ICD-based codes to identify pediatric cases of congenital cytomegalovirus.
Article in Current medical research and opinion, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveAdministrative claims databases are used to study the care of congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV), yet the use of International Classification of Diseases, (ICD-9/10) codes for cCMV have not been validated. This study examines the accuracy of ICD-based codes for cCMV infection.
methodsInfants cared for at a quaternary children's hospital (2013-2023) that had an ICD-based diagnosis for cCMV or CMV Infection at ≤90 days of age were included. Medical record data was abstracted. True Positive cases were defined as those with an ICD code AND clinical and laboratory evidence consistent with cCMV. False Positive cases were defined as those with an ICD code without evidence of cCMV. Positive predictive value (PPV) and sensitivity for each diagnostic code at different age cutoffs were calculated within the cohort. Multinomial regression examined characteristics of the infant with odds of being a True Positive case of cCMV.
resultsOf the 108 infants with ICD-9/10 codes for cCMV, 35% were false positives. PPV for ICD-9/10-CM codes for cCMV, CMV Infection, and Either code predicting actual cCMV were 0.86, 0.36, and 0.68 at age ≤45 days. PPV was the highest at ≤21 days of age, and for all codes sensitivity increased with patient age. Multinomial logistic regression found the age of the first diagnostic code ≤21 days (vs. >) (OR = 4.11, 95% CI 1.45-12.03), having an ICD-9/10-CM diagnostic code of cCMV (vs. CMV Infection) (OR = 10.87, 95% CI 3.64-32.47), and having Clinical Signs at Birth (vs. none) (OR = 8.4, 95% CI 2.72-25.81) to be associated with greater odds of having a True Positive case of cCMV (vs. Not cCMV).
conclusionsAdministrative claims case definitions for cCMV were more likely to be accurate when assigned at a younger age. Studies using case definitions for cCMV that include the presence of codes for either cCMV or CMV Infection may be biased given the high proportion of false positives demonstrated in this study.
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.