20 research outputs found

    Wellness and Multiple Sclerosis: The National MS Society Establishes a Wellness Research Working Group and Research Priorities

    Get PDF
    Background: People with multiple sclerosis (MS) have identified “wellness” and associated behaviors as a high priority based on “social media listening” undertaken by the National MS Society (i.e. the Society). Objective: The Society recently convened a group that consisted of researchers with experience in MS and wellness-related research, Society staff members, and an individual with MS for developing recommendations regarding a wellness research agenda. Method: The members of the group engaged in focal reviews and discussions involving the state of science within three approaches for promoting wellness in MS, namely diet, exercise, and emotional wellness. Results: That process informed a group-mediated activity for developing and prioritizing research goals for wellness in MS. This served as a background for articulating the mission and objectives of the Society’s Wellness Research Working Group. Conclusion: The primary mission of the Wellness Research Working Group is the provision of scientific evidence supporting the application of lifestyle, behavioral, and psychosocial approaches for promoting optimal health of mind, body, and spirit (i.e. wellness) in people with MS as well as managing the disease and its consequences

    Data from: A new way to estimate neurologic disease prevalence in the United States

    No full text
    Objective: Considerable gaps exist in knowledge regarding the prevalence of neurologic diseases, such as multiple sclerosis (MS), in the United States. Therefore, the MS Prevalence Working Group sought to review and evaluate alternative methods for obtaining a scientifically valid estimate of national MS prevalence in the current health care era. Methods: We carried out a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis for 3 approaches to estimate MS prevalence: population-based MS registries, national probability health surveys, and analysis of administrative health claims databases. We reviewed MS prevalence studies conducted in the United States and critically examined possible methods for estimating national MS prevalence. Results: We developed a new 4-step approach for estimating MS prevalence in the United States. First, identify administrative health claim databases covering publicly and privately insured populations in the United States. Second, develop and validate a highly accurate MS case-finding algorithm that can be standardly applied in all databases. Third, apply a case definition algorithm to estimate MS prevalence in each population. Fourth, combine MS prevalence estimates into a single estimate of US prevalence, weighted according to the number of insured persons in each health insurance segment. Conclusions: By addressing methodologic challenges and proposing a new approach for measuring the prevalence of MS in the United States, we hope that our work will benefit scientists who study neurologic and other chronic conditions for which national prevalence estimates do not exist

    A new way to estimate neurologic disease prevalence in the United States: Illustrated with MS

    No full text
    Considerable gaps exist in knowledge regarding the prevalence of neurologic diseases, such as multiple sclerosis (MS), in the United States. Therefore, the MS Prevalence Working Group sought to review and evaluate alternative methods for obtaining a scientifically valid estimate of national MS prevalence in the current health care era.MethodsWe carried out a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) analysis for 3 approaches to estimate MS prevalence: population-based MS registries, national probability health surveys, and analysis of administrative health claims databases. We reviewed MS prevalence studies conducted in the United States and critically examined possible methods for estimating national MS prevalence.ResultsWe developed a new 4-step approach for estimating MS prevalence in the United States. First, identify administrative health claim databases covering publicly and privately insured populations in the United States. Second, develop and validate a highly accurate MS case-finding algorithm that can be standardly applied in all databases. Third, apply a case definition algorithm to estimate MS prevalence in each population. Fourth, combine MS prevalence estimates into a single estimate of US prevalence, weighted according to the number of insured persons in each health insurance segment.ConclusionsBy addressing methodologic challenges and proposing a new approach for measuring the prevalence of MS in the United States, we hope that our work will benefit scientists who study neurologic and other chronic conditions for which national prevalence estimates do not exist

    Validation of an algorithm for identifying MS cases in administrative health claims datasets

    No full text
    To develop a valid algorithm for identifying multiple sclerosis (MS) cases in administrative health claims (AHC) datasets.MethodsWe used 4 AHC datasets from the Veterans Administration (VA), Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC), Manitoba (Canada), and Saskatchewan (Canada). In the VA, KPSC, and Manitoba, we tested the performance of candidate algorithms based on inpatient, outpatient, and disease-modifying therapy (DMT) claims compared to medical records review using sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and interrater reliability (Youden J statistic) both overall and stratified by sex and age. In Saskatchewan, we tested the algorithms in a cohort randomly selected from the general population.ResultsThe preferred algorithm required ≥3 MS-related claims from any combination of inpatient, outpatient, or DMT claims within a 1-year time period; a 2-year time period provided little gain in performance. Algorithms including DMT claims performed better than those that did not. Sensitivity (86.6%-96.0%), specificity (66.7%-99.0%), positive predictive value (95.4%-99.0%), and interrater reliability (Youden J = 0.60-0.92) were generally stable across datasets and across strata. Some variation in performance in the stratified analyses was observed but largely reflected changes in the composition of the strata. In Saskatchewan, the preferred algorithm had a sensitivity of 96%, specificity of 99%, positive predictive value of 99%, and negative predictive value of 96%.ConclusionsThe performance of each algorithm was remarkably consistent across datasets. The preferred algorithm required ≥3 MS-related claims from any combination of inpatient, outpatient, or DMT use within 1 year. We recommend this algorithm as the standard AHC case definition for MS

    Data from: Validation of an algorithm for identifying MS cases in administrative health claims datasets

    No full text
    Objective: To develop a valid algorithm for identifying multiple sclerosis (MS) cases in administrative health claims (AHC) datasets. Methods: We used 4 AHC datasets from the Veterans Administration (VA), Kaiser Permanente Southern California (KPSC), Manitoba (Canada), and Saskatchewan (Canada). In the VA, KPSC, and Manitoba, we tested the performance of candidate algorithms based on inpatient, outpatient, and disease-modifying therapy (DMT) claims compared to medical records review using sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and interrater reliability (Youden J statistic) both overall and stratified by sex and age. In Saskatchewan, we tested the algorithms in a cohort randomly selected from the general population. Results: The preferred algorithm required ≥3 MS-related claims from any combination of inpatient, outpatient, or DMT claims within a 1-year time period; a 2-year time period provided little gain in performance. Algorithms including DMT claims performed better than those that did not. Sensitivity (86.6%–96.0%), specificity (66.7%–99.0%), positive predictive value (95.4%–99.0%), and interrater reliability (Youden J = 0.60–0.92) were generally stable across datasets and across strata. Some variation in performance in the stratified analyses was observed but largely reflected changes in the composition of the strata. In Saskatchewan, the preferred algorithm had a sensitivity of 96%, specificity of 99%, positive predictive value of 99%, and negative predictive value of 96%. Conclusions: The performance of each algorithm was remarkably consistent across datasets. The preferred algorithm required ≥3 MS-related claims from any combination of inpatient, outpatient, or DMT use within 1 year. We recommend this algorithm as the standard AHC case definition for MS

    The prevalence of MS in the United States: A population-based estimate using health claims data

    No full text
    To generate a national multiple sclerosis (MS) prevalence estimate for the United States by applying a validated algorithm to multiple administrative health claims (AHC) datasets.MethodsA validated algorithm was applied to private, military, and public AHC datasets to identify adult cases of MS between 2008 and 2010. In each dataset, we determined the 3-year cumulative prevalence overall and stratified by age, sex, and census region. We applied insurance-specific and stratum-specific estimates to the 2010 US Census data and pooled the findings to calculate the 2010 prevalence of MS in the United States cumulated over 3 years. We also estimated the 2010 prevalence cumulated over 10 years using 2 models and extrapolated our estimate to 2017.ResultsThe estimated 2010 prevalence of MS in the US adult population cumulated over 10 years was 309.2 per 100,000 (95% confidence interval [CI] 308.1-310.1), representing 727,344 cases. During the same time period, the MS prevalence was 450.1 per 100,000 (95% CI 448.1-451.6) for women and 159.7 (95% CI 158.7-160.6) for men (female:male ratio 2.8). The estimated 2010 prevalence of MS was highest in the 55- to 64-year age group. A US north-south decreasing prevalence gradient was identified. The estimated MS prevalence is also presented for 2017.ConclusionThe estimated US national MS prevalence for 2010 is the highest reported to date and provides evidence that the north-south gradient persists. Our rigorous algorithm-based approach to estimating prevalence is efficient and has the potential to be used for other chronic neurologic conditions
    corecore