We defined individuals with SLE as having ≥ 3 International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision (ICD-9) codes for SLE (710.0), each at least 30 days apart, from hospital discharge diagnoses or physician visit claims. We required three billing codes to eliminate “rule-out” SLE cases. Among individuals with SLE, we identified those with lupus nephritis (LN), defined as having ≥ 2 ICD-9 hospital discharge diagnoses or physician billing claims for nephritis, proteinuria and/or renal failure, on or after the SLE diagnosis, and at least 30 days apart. This algorithm has been demonstrated to have a positive predictive value of 80 percent for the identification of adults with LN in a Medicaid population (20 (link)). We also performed a sensitivity analysis for LN that used >2 SLE claims with the aforementioned >2 LN-related claims.
Protocol detail
Identifying Lupus Nephritis in SLE Patients
Partial Protocol Preview
This section provides a glimpse into the protocol.
The remaining content is hidden due to licensing restrictions, but the full text is available at the following link:
Access Free Full Text.
Top 5 similar protocols
Protocol cited in 13 other protocols
Variable analysis
independent variables
- Having ≥ 3 International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision (ICD-9) codes for SLE (710.0), each at least 30 days apart, from hospital discharge diagnoses or physician visit claims
- Having ≥ 2 ICD-9 hospital discharge diagnoses or physician billing claims for nephritis, proteinuria and/or renal failure, on or after the SLE diagnosis, and at least 30 days apart
- Identification of adults with lupus nephritis (LN)
- Requiring three billing codes to eliminate 'rule-out' SLE cases
- The algorithm has been demonstrated to have a positive predictive value of 80 percent for the identification of adults with LN in a Medicaid population
- A sensitivity analysis for LN that used >2 SLE claims with the aforementioned >2 LN-related claims
Annotations
Based on most similar protocols
Etiam vel ipsum. Morbi facilisis vestibulum nisl. Praesent cursus laoreet felis. Integer adipiscing pretium orci. Nulla facilisi. Quisque posuere bibendum purus. Nulla quam mauris, cursus eget, convallis ac, molestie non, enim. Aliquam congue. Quisque sagittis nonummy sapien. Proin molestie sem vitae urna. Maecenas lorem.
Sign up for free or login to display all annotations
As authors may omit details in methods from publication, our AI will look for missing critical information across the 5 most similar protocols.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!