Abstract
Background Coded healthcare data may not capture all stroke cases and has limited accuracy for stroke subtypes. We sought to determine the incremental value of adding natural language processing (NLP) of free-text radiology reports to international classification of disease (ICD-10) codes to phenotype stroke, and stroke subtypes, in routinely collected healthcare datasets.
Methods We linked participants in a community-based prospective cohort study, Generation Scotland, to clinical brain imaging reports (2008-2020) from five Scottish health boards. We used five combinations of NLP outputs and ICD-10 codes to define stroke phenotypes. With these phenotype models we measured the: stroke incidence standardised to a European Standardised Population; adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of baseline hypertension for later stroke; and proportion of participants allocated stroke subtypes.
Results Of 19,026 participants, over a mean follow-up of 10.2 years, 1938 had 3493 brain scans. Any stroke was identified in 534 participants: 319 with NLP alone, 59 with ICD-10 codes alone and 156 with both ICD-10 codes and an NLP report consistent with stroke. The stroke aHR for baseline hypertension was 1.47 (95%CI: 1.12-1.92) for NLP-defined stroke only; 1.57 (95%CI: 1.18-2.10) for ICD-10 defined stroke only; and 1.81 (95%CI: 1.20-2.72) for cases with ICD 10 stroke codes and NLP stroke phenotypes. The age-standardised incidence of stroke for these phenotype models was 1.35, 1.34, and 0.65 per 1000 person years, respectively. The proportion of strokes not subtyped was 26% (57/215) using only ICD-10, 9% (42/467) using only NLP, and 12% (65/534) using both NLP and ICD-10.
Conclusions Addition of NLP derived phenotypes to ICD-10 stroke codes identified approximately 2.5 times more stroke cases and greatly increased the proportion with subtyping. The phenotype model using ICD 10 stroke codes and NLP stroke phenotypes had the strongest association with baseline hypertension. This information is relevant to large cohort studies and clinical trials that use routine electronic health records for outcome ascertainment.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
BA, AC, and CG have been supported by The Alan Turing Institute via Turing Fellowships (BA, CG) and Turing project funding (ESPRC Grant EP/N510129/1). BA, CG, AMM and HCW were funded by MRC Mental Health Data Pathfinder Award (MRC-MCPC17209). ELB, MI and AMM are supported by the Wellcome Trust 220857/Z/20/Z. AMM and MI are supported by DATAMIND UKRI award MR/W014386/1. ED was supported by the Alzheimer's Society. WW was supported by the CSO (CAF/17/01), the Alzheimer's Society, HDRUK and the Stroke Association. Generation Scotland received core support from the Chief Scientist Office (CSO) of the Scottish Government Health Directorates [CZD/16/6] and the Scottish Funding Council [HR03006] and is currently supported by the Wellcome Trust [216767/Z/19/Z].
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Not Applicable
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
GS has ethical approval for the SFHS study (reference number 05/S1401/89) and 21CGH study (reference number 06/S1401/27) and both studies are now part of a Research Tissue Bank (reference 20-ES-0021).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Not Applicable
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Not Applicable
Data Availability
The dataset Generation Scotland used in this study can be applied for via https://www.ed.ac.uk/generation-scotland/for-researchers/access.
Non-standard Abbreviations and Acronyms
- EHR
- Electronic Health Record
- GS
- Generation Scotland
- ICD 10
- International classification of disease 10
- NLP
- Natural language processing
- SMR
- Scottish morbidity record
- 21CGH
- GS 21st Century Genetic Health study
- SFHS
- GS Scottish Family Health Study
