Estimating Disease Prevalence in Administrative Data.

PURPOSE

Disease prevalence estimates from population-based administrative databases are often biased due to measurement (misclassification) errors. The purpose of this article is to review the methodology for estimating disease prevalence in administrative data, with a focus on bias correction.

SOURCE

Several approaches to bias correction in administrative data were reviewed and application of these methods was demonstrated using an example from the literature: physician claims and hospitalization data were employed to estimate diabetes prevalence in Ontario, Canada.

FINDINGS

Misclassification bias in prevalence estimates from administrative data can be reduced by developing and selecting an optimal algorithm for case identification, applying a bias correction formula, or using statistical modelling. An algorithm for which sensitivity equals positive predictive value provides an unbiased estimate of prevalence. Bias reduction methods generally require information about the measurement properties of the algorithm, such as sensitivity, specificity, or predictive value. These properties depend on disease type, prevalence, algorithm definition (including the observation window), and may vary by population and time. Prevalence estimates can be improved by applying multivariable disease prediction models.

CONCLUSION

Frequency of a positive case identification algorithm in administrative data is generally not equivalent to disease prevalence. Although prevalence estimates can be corrected for bias using known measurement properties of the algorithm, these properties may be difficult to estimate accurately; therefore, disease prevalence estimates based on administrative data must be treated with caution.