Diagnostic accuracy of algorithms to identify hepatitis C status, AIDS status, alcohol consumption and illicit drug use among patients living with HIV in an administrative healthcare database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aims to develop and evaluate diagnostic algorithms for AIDS, hepatitis C status, alcohol abuse and illicit drug use in the administrative healthcare database of the Province of Quebec, Canada (Régie de l'assurance-maladie du Québec (RAMQ)). METHODS: We selected HIV-positive patients contributing to both the RAMQ database and a local clinical database, which was used as gold standard. We developed algorithms to identify the diagnoses of interest in RAMQ using data from hospital discharge summaries and medical and pharmaceutical claims databases. We estimated and compared sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive and negative predictive values and area under receiver operating curve for each algorithm. RESULTS: Four hundred twenty patients contributed to both databases. Prevalence of conditions of interest in the clinical database was as follows: AIDS 233 (55%), hepatitis C infection 105 (25%), alcohol abuse 106 (25%), illicit drug use 144 (34%) and intravenous drug use 107 (25%). Sensitivity to detect AIDS, hepatitis C, alcohol abuse, illicit drug use and intravenous drug use was 46% [95%CI: 39-53], 26% [18-35], 50% [37-57], 64% [55-72] and 70% [61-79], respectively. Specificity to detect these conditions was 91% [86-95], 97% [94-98], 92% [88-95], 95% [92-97] and 90% [87-93], respectively. Positive predictive values were 87% [80-92], 71% [54-85], 68% [56-78], 87% [79-93] and 72% [62-80], respectively. Area under receiver operating curve varied from 0.62 [0.57-0.65] for hepatitis C to 0.80 [0.76-0.85] for intravenous drug use. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity was low to detect AIDS, alcohol abuse, illicit drug use and especially hepatitis C in RAMQ. Researchers must be aware of the potential for residual confounding and must consider additional methods to control for confounding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".