Skip to main content
Log in

Analysis of a claims database for the identification of patients with carcinoma of the breast

  • Articles
  • Published:
Journal of Medical Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To develop and optimize algorithms for the identification of newly diagnosed and treated cases of women with carcinoma of the breast, an analysis was performed of cases identified from the claims database of a large health maintenance organization (U.S. Healthcare). An initial algorithm was developed from the patterns of claims which suggested common clinical presentations of carcinoma of the breast, and the positive predictive value was 88% (411/469). To attempt to improve upon the positive predictive value, multiple modifications of the initial algorithm were performed. The best identified modification of the initial algorithm yielded a positive predictive value of 93% (400/432) with a loss of only 3% (11/411) of the true positive cases. These results demonstrate that logic-based algorithms can be used as a valid and efficient method of identifying large numbers of cases from claims data with specific clinical characteristics. The best algorithm identified provides a powerful and accurate tool to perform health care analysis and research on large populations of women with newly diagnosed and treated carcinoma of the breast.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kosecoff, J., Fink, A., Brook, R.H., and Chassin, M.R., The appropriateness of using a medical procedure: Is information in the medical record valid?Med. Care 25:196–201, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Roos, L.L., Cageorge, S.M., Austen, E., and Lohr, K.N., Using computers to identify complications after surgery.Am. J. Public Health 75:1288–1295, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Roos, L.L., Cageorge, S.M., Roos, N.P., and Danzinger, R., Centralization, certification, and monitoring: Readmissions and complications after surgery.Med. Care 24:1044–1066, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Roos, L.L., Sharp, S.M., and Wajda, A., Assessing data quality: A computerized approach.Social Sci. Med. 28:175–182, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Roos, L.L., Wajda, A., Sharp, S.M., and Nicol, J.P., Software for health care analysts: A modular approach.J. Med. Syst. 11:445–464, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Wennberg, J.E., Roos, N., Sola, L., Schori, A., and Jaffe, R., Use of claims data systems to evaluate health care outcomes: Mortality and reoperation following prostatectomy.J. Am. Med. Assoc. 257:933–936, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Long, S.H., Gibbs, J.O., Crozier, J.P., Cooper, D.I., Newman, J.F., and Larsen, A.M., Medical expenditures of terminal cancer patients during the last year of life.Inquiry 21:315–327, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Spector, W.D., and Mor, V., Utilization and charges for terminal cancer patients in Rhode Island.Inquiry 21:328–337, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  9. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Health Care Financing Administration. ICD-9-CM: The International Classification of Diseases. 9th revision: Clinical modification. Third edition. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989, DHHS Publication No. (PHS) 89-1260.

  10. Current Procedural Terminology. Fourth edition. American Medical Association, Chicago, Illinois, 1991.

  11. Fowble, B., Goodman, R.L., Glick, J.H., and Rosato, E.F. (eds.),Breast cancer treatment: A comprehensive guide to management. Mosby Year Book, St. Louis, MO, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Harris, J.R., Morrow, M., and Bonadonna, G. Cancer of the breast. In:Cancer: Principles and Practice of Oncology (fourth edition), DeVita, V.T., Hellman, S., Rosenberg, S.A. (Eds.). J.B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 1264–1332, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Nattinger, A.B., Gottlieb, M.S., Veum, J., Yahnke, D., and Goodwin, J.S. Geographic variation in the use of breast-conserving treatment of breast cancer.New Engl. J. Med. 326:1102–1107, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Farrow, D.C., Hunt, W.C., and Samet, J.M., Geographic variation in the treatment of localized breast cancer.New Engl. J. Med. 326:1097–1101, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bright, R.A., Avorn, J., and Everitt, D.E., Medicaid data as a resource for epidemiologic studies: Strengths and limitations.J. Clin. Epidemiol. 42:937–945, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Lohr, K.N., Use of insurance claims data in measuring quality of care.Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 6:263–271, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Steinberg, E.P., Whittle, J., and Anderson, G.F., The impact of claims data research on clinical practice.Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 6:282–287, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Weiner, J.P., Powe, N.R., Steinwachs, D.M., and Dent, G., Applying insurance claims data to assess quality of care: A compilation of potential indicators.Quality Rev. Bull. 16:424–438, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hsia, D.C., Krushat, W.M., Fagan, A.B., Tebbutt, J.A., and Kusserow, R.P., Accuracy of diagnostic coding for Medicare patients under the prospective-payment system.New Engl. J. Med. 318:352–355, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Solin, L.J., Legorreta, A., Schultz, D.J. et al. Analysis of a claims database for the identification of patients with carcinoma of the breast. J Med Syst 18, 23–32 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999321

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00999321

Keywords

Navigation