Validated methods for identifying individuals with obesity in health care administrative databases: A systematic review

Abstract

Background: Health care administrative databases are increasingly used for health studies and public health surveillance. Cases of individuals with obesity are selected using case-identification methods. However, the validity of these methods is fragmentary and particularly challenging for obesity case identification. Objective: The objectives of this systematic review are to (1) determine the caseidentification methods used to identify individuals with obesity in health care administrative databases and (2) to summarize the validity of these case-identification methods when compared with a reference standard. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in six bibliographic databases for the period January 1980 to June 2019 for all studies evaluating obesity caseidentification methods compared with a reference standard. Results: Seventeen articles met the inclusion criteria. International Classification of Diseases (ICD) codes were the only case-identification method utilized in selected articles. The performance of obesity-identification methods varied widely across studies, with positive predictive value ranging from 19% to 100% while sensitivity ranged from 3% to 92%. The sensitivity of these methods was usually low while the specificity was higher. Conclusion: When obesity is reported in health care administrative databases, it is usually correctly reported; however, obesity tends to be highly underreported in databases. Therefore, case-identification methods to monitor the prevalence and incidence of obesity within health care administrative databases are not reliable. In contrast, the use of these methods remains relevant for the selection of individuals with obesity for cohort studies, particularly when identifying cohorts of individuals with severe obesity or cohorts where obesity is associated with comorbidities.

Economic burden of rivaroxaban and warfarin among nonvalvular atrial fibrillation patients with obesity and polypharmacy

“…Since height and weight are not available in claims data, some patients with obesity may not have been captured in this analysis. Consistent with this, previous validation studies have shown that diagnostic codes for obesity may underestimate the true prevalence of obesity [75]. However, given the high specificity and modest to high positive predictive values, diagnosis codes may be considered a viable method of identifying obese patients [76][77][78][79].…”

Completeness and representativeness of body mass index in children's electronic general practice records: Linked cross‐sectional study in an ethnically‐diverse urban population in the United Kingdom

“…A systematic review of 17 American and Canadian studies which identified patients with obesity using EHR obesity diagnosis codes found that obesity was usually recorded correctly; however, obesity was underreported in EHRs when compared to a reference standard 26 . Whilst we also found that the majority of children with a BMI considered obese in the NCMP would also be categorized as obese based on their GP‐BMI, the use of obesity diagnosis codes, as opposed to BMI records, to identify patients with obesity is likely to explain our contrasting findings relating to the under and overreporting of obesity based on EHRs.…”

Association of clinically significant obstructive sleep apnoea with risks of contracting COVID-19 and serious COVID-19 complications: a retrospective population-based study of health administrative data

“…For example, clinical characteristics such as smoking or BMI cannot be measured using health administrative data. In addition, obesity tends to be highly under-reported in health administrative databases 49. We minimise this limitation by using IPTW, which mimics attributes of a randomised clinical trial, to adjust for confounders; however, like all propensity score methods, IPTW cannot adjust for characteristics that are not measured.…”