Key result
Machine learning applied to ICD codes identifies true CHD cases with ~95% PPV.
Why the study?
ICD codes used for congenital heart defect case identification have substantial false-positive rates, and incorporating machine learning may improve identification accuracy.
Do machine learning algorithms improve the accuracy of identifying congenital heart defects compared to ICD codes alone in patients with at least one CHD ICD code?
Observational (n=3,334)
Yes
Do machine learning algorithms improve the accuracy of identifying congenital heart defects compared to ICD codes alone in patients with at least one CHD ICD code?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Applying machine learning algorithms to patients identified by CHD-related ICD codes significantly improves the positive predictive value of true congenital heart defect case identification.
BACKGROUND: International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes utilized for congenital heart defect (CHD) case identification in datasets have substantial false-positive (FP) rates. Incorporating machine learning (ML) algorithms following case selection by ICD codes may improve the accuracy of CHD identification, enhancing surveillance efforts. METHODS: Traditional ML methods were applied to four encounter-level datasets, 2010-2019, for 3334 patients with validated diagnoses and with at least one CHD ICD code identified. A 5-fold cross-validation approach was applied to the dataset to determine the set of overlapping important features best classifying CHD cases. Training and testing combinations were explored to determine the approach yielding the most accurate CHD classification. RESULTS: CHD ICD positive predictive values (PPVs) by site ranged from 53.2% to 84.0%. The ML algorithm achieved a PPV of 95% (1273/1340) for the four-site dataset with a false-negative (FN) rate of 33% (639/1912) by choosing an operating point prioritizing PPV from the PPV-FN rate curve. XGBoost reduced 2105 Clinical Classification Software (CCS) features to 137 that identified those with true-positive (TP) CHD and false-positive FP classification. CONCLUSION: Applying ML algorithms following case selection by CHD-related ICD codes improved the accuracy of identifying TP true-positive CHD cases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Shi et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Congenital Heart Defects (CHDs) (n=3,334). Machine learning (ML) algorithms vs. ICD codes alone was evaluated on Positive predictive value (PPV) for CHD identification. Applying machine learning algorithms following case selection by CHD-related ICD codes achieved a positive predictive value of 95% for identifying true-positive CHD cases.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: