-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
M3 Multimorbidity Index implemented for ICD-10-AM. #59
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Hi @mattmoo, Alessandro |
#' * `flag_comp_diab`, for flagging for diabetes complications; | ||
#' * `flag_exc_osteo`, for flagging for osteoporosis exclusions; | ||
#' * `flag_exc_hyp`, for flagging for hypertension exclusions; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If I understand correctly, these are flags to set these comorbidities to zero if any of these codes are found. Is that right?
If so, do you think it would be a good idea to drop them before returning the dataset with comorbidities?
In addition to that, I would suggest re-arranging these to be in the same order of Supplementary Table 5 in the Stanley and Sarfati paper.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks Alessandro. I do think that would result in a cleaner user experience, the potential issues that I saw were:
- That is not implemented (or necessary) for the other scales, so wasn't sure if that's a direction you wanted to go.
- My understanding would be that it is implemented in
.assign0()
, but given that is called in bothcomorbidity()
andscore()
, could removing columns at one stage or the other result in an error state (particularly when multiplying by weights) that requires M3-specific code in those functions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the updates and clarifications.
I was exactly thinking about including this in assign0()
, but then realised (as you point out here) that such columns would be needed by the score()
function.
I need to think a bit about how to implement this effectively within the current infrastructure. I will leave this hanging for now, but I'll get back to you - hope that's okay!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Of course, will wait to hear from you.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hi,
I found some small things to be edited/discussed before merging this PR, please see the comments above.
Thanks!
Alessandro
I don't suppose that there has been any progress on this? |
Hi @mattmoo, Sorry – I haven't had time to progress on this, but it looks like things will be calmer in the next few months. I'll get back to this as soon as I can. Thanks, Alessandro |
Thanks Allesandro, I understand. We've got a couple of big reports being published soon, so it would be good to simplify the reference list! |
Hi Allesandro, is this likely to be merged? |
Kia ora,
Thanks for all your work on this package.
This is a pull request containing an implementation of the M3 Multimorbidity Index, as described in Stanley J, Sarfati D. The new measuring multimorbidity index predicted mortality better than Charlson and Elixhauser indices among the general population. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Dec;92:99-110. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.08.005. Epub 2017 Aug 24. PMID: 28844785.
I've tried to format and implement everything close to what is already there, hopefully I got pretty close. Happy to discuss!
Cheers, Matt