Lo, Wei-Hsuan
(2010)
Identifying And Validating Type 1 And Type 2 Diabetic Cases Using Administrative Date: A Tree-Structured Model.
Master's Thesis, University of Pittsburgh.
(Unpublished)
Abstract
Background: Planning, implementing, monitoring, temporal evolution and prognosis differ between type 1 diabetes (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM). To date, few administrative diabetes registries have distinguished T1DM from T2DM, reflecting the lack of required differential information and possible recording bias. Objective: Using a classification tree model, we developed a prediction rule to distinguish T1DM from T2DM accurately, using information from a large administrative database.Methods: The Medical Archival Retrieval System (MARS) at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center from 1/1/2000-9/30/2009 included administrative and clinical data for 209,642 unique diabetic patients aged ≥ 18 years. We identified 10,004 T1DM and 156,712 T2DM patients as probable or possible cases, based on clinical criteria. Classification tree models were fit using TIBCO Spotfire S+ 8.1 (TIBCO Software). We used 10-fold cross-validation to choose model size. We estimated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of T1DM.Results: The main predictors that distinguished T1DM from T2DM include age < 40 vs. ≥ 40 years, ICD-9 codes of T1DM or T2DM diagnosis, oral hypoglycemic agent use, insulin use, and episode(s) of diabetic ketoacidosis diagnosis. History of hypoglycemic coma, duration in the MARS database, in-patient diagnosis of diabetes, and number of complications (including myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft, dialysis, neuropathy, retinopathy, and amputation) are ancillary predictors. The tree-structured model to predict T1DM from probable cases yields sensitivity (99.63%), specificity (99.28%), PPV (89.87%) and NPV (99.71%).Conclusion: Our preliminary predictive rule to distinguish between T1DM and T2DM cases in a large administrative database appears to be promising and needs to be validated. The public health significance is that being able to distinguish between these diabetes subtypes will allow future subtype-specific analyses of cost, morbidity, and mortality. Future work will focus on ascertaining the validity and generalizability of our predictive rule, by conducting a review of medical charts (as an internal validation) and applying the rule to another MARS dataset or other administrative databases (as external validations).
Share
| Citation/Export: |
|
| Social Networking: |
|
Details
| Item Type: |
University of Pittsburgh ETD
|
| Status: |
Unpublished |
| Creators/Authors: |
|
| ETD Committee: |
|
| Date: |
28 June 2010 |
| Date Type: |
Completion |
| Defense Date: |
19 April 2010 |
| Approval Date: |
28 June 2010 |
| Submission Date: |
12 April 2010 |
| Access Restriction: |
No restriction; Release the ETD for access worldwide immediately. |
| Institution: |
University of Pittsburgh |
| Schools and Programs: |
School of Public Health > Biostatistics |
| Degree: |
MS - Master of Science |
| Thesis Type: |
Master's Thesis |
| Refereed: |
Yes |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: |
classification and regression tree (CART); T1DM; T2DM; Type 1 diabetes; Type 2 diabetes; Diabetes mellitus; tree-structured model; validation; administrative data |
| Other ID: |
http://etd.library.pitt.edu/ETD/available/etd-04122010-221446/, etd-04122010-221446 |
| Date Deposited: |
10 Nov 2011 19:36 |
| Last Modified: |
15 Nov 2016 13:39 |
| URI: |
http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/id/eprint/7078 |
Metrics
Monthly Views for the past 3 years
Plum Analytics
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
![[feed]](/images/feed-icon-32x32.png){kind=icon}