Accuracy of Medicare Claims Data in Identifying Parkinsonism Cases

Comparison with the Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey

Published in: Movement Disorders, v. 22, no. 4, Mar. 15, 2007, p. 509-514

Posted on on January 01, 2007

by Katia Noyes, Harry H. Liu, Robert G. Holloway, Andrew W. Dick

Read More

Access further information on this document at

This article was published outside of RAND. The full text of the article can be found at the link above.

STUDY PURPOSE: Administrative databases are commonly used to examine use of healthcare service, with researchers relying on diagnostic codes to identify medical conditions. This study evaluates the accuracy of administrative claims in identifying Parkinsonism cases compared to the self-reported Parkinson's disease (PD). METHODS: The reference cases were identified based on the self-reported PD status and the use of PD drugs collected by the 1992-2000 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey that contained 72,922 observations from 30,469 individuals. Using ICD-9 CM, cases with PD were extracted from the corresponding Medicare claims. The authors compared prevalence of PD obtained using different types of claims. RESULTS: The sensitivities were the highest when all claims were used (66%). All the specificities were greater than 99%. When drug use information was included in the gold standard, the sensitivities became lower, while the specificities and positive predictive values (PPVs) increased. Using more diagnostic codes improved the sensitivity of the identification process but reduced PPVs. CONCLUSIONS: Administrative claims can provide fairly accurate and practical approach to rule in patients with PD. Depending on the purpose of evaluation, researchers may consider using more categories of claims to improve the sensitivity of the identification algorithm or use fewer diagnoses to minimize number of false positive cases.

This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.

Our mission to help improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis is enabled through our core values of quality and objectivity and our unwavering commitment to the highest level of integrity and ethical behavior. To help ensure our research and analysis are rigorous, objective, and nonpartisan, we subject our research publications to a robust and exacting quality-assurance process; avoid both the appearance and reality of financial and other conflicts of interest through staff training, project screening, and a policy of mandatory disclosure; and pursue transparency in our research engagements through our commitment to the open publication of our research findings and recommendations, disclosure of the source of funding of published research, and policies to ensure intellectual independence. For more information, visit

The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.