Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: JMIR Public Health and Surveillance

Date Submitted: Jun 30, 2025
Date Accepted: Sep 24, 2025

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Equivalence of Type 2 Diabetes Prevalence Estimates: Comparative Study of Similar Phenotyping Algorithms Using Electronic Health Record Data

Wandai ME, Allen KS, Wiensch A, Price J, Dixon BE

Equivalence of Type 2 Diabetes Prevalence Estimates: Comparative Study of Similar Phenotyping Algorithms Using Electronic Health Record Data

JMIR Public Health Surveill 2025;11:e79653

DOI: 10.2196/79653

PMID: 41144654

PMCID: 12571427

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Type 2 Diabetes Prevalence Estimates using EHR Data with Similar Phenotyping Algorithms: A Test of Equivalence using Two One-sided t-Test

  • Muchiri E. Wandai; 
  • Katie S. Allen; 
  • Ashley Wiensch; 
  • John Price; 
  • Brian E. Dixon

ABSTRACT

Background:

Timely surveillance of diabetes mellitus remains a challenge for public health. In this study, researchers compared 2022 Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) prevalence estimates using EHR data and computable phenotypes (CPs) as defined and applied by two initiatives, one a research consortium, and the other a public health surveillance network.

Objective:

The purpose of this study is to compare two computable phenotypes (CP) methods for estimating prevalence of type 2 diabetes using EHR data.

Methods:

Diagnostic, laboratory, and medication data for young adults aged 18-44 years were extracted from multiple EHR systems serving the eleven counties constituting the Indianapolis metropolitan area. Similar but distinct CPs from each network were used to estimate prevalence. The Two One-Sided T-Test (TOST) was used to compare the estimated prevalences. TOST results at the overall level, and stratified by sex, age, and race/ethnicity were examined.

Results:

Overall prevalence estimates for 2022 were 4.1% for CP1 and 2.4% for CP2. Although prevalence estimates from CP1 were consistently and slightly higher than those of CP2, absolute differences were generally less than 2.0 percentage points which did not result in a statistical difference between values. Therefore, we conclude the two computable phenotypes largely produce equivalent estimates of T2D prevalence. However, prevalence estimates for Hispanic patients were significantly different.

Conclusions:

The two computable phenotypes showed equivalent T2D prevalence estimates. Although the CPs can be considered statistically equivalent, the data driving each CP may impact accuracy and completeness. One CP was driven primarily by clinical diagnostic codes, whereas the other considered laboratory data and medications along with T2D clinical diagnosis. Results have implications for the improvement of CPs for public health surveillance. Clinical Trial: Not applicable


 Citation

Please cite as:

Wandai ME, Allen KS, Wiensch A, Price J, Dixon BE

Equivalence of Type 2 Diabetes Prevalence Estimates: Comparative Study of Similar Phenotyping Algorithms Using Electronic Health Record Data

JMIR Public Health Surveill 2025;11:e79653

DOI: 10.2196/79653

PMID: 41144654

PMCID: 12571427

Download PDF


Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.