ABSTRACT
Objective We aimed to establish a comprehensive digital phenotype for postpartum hemorrhage (PPH). Current guidelines rely primarily on estimates of blood loss, which can be inaccurate and biased, and ignore a suite of complementary information readily available in electronic medical records (EMR). Inaccurate and incomplete phenotyping contribute to ongoing challenges to track PPH outcomes, develop more accurate risk assessments, and identify novel interventions.
Methods We constructed a cohort of 71,944 deliveries from the Mount Sinai Health System, 2011-2019. Estimates of postpartum blood loss, shifts in hematocrit intra- and postpartum, administration of uterotonics, surgical treatments, and associated diagnostic codes were combined to identify PPH retrospectively. All clinical features were extracted from structured EMR data and mapped to common data models for maximum interoperability across hospitals. Blinded chart review was done on a randomly selected subset of cases and controls for validation and performance was compared to alternate PPH phenotypes.
Results We identified 6,639 cases (9% prevalence) using our phenotype – more than three times as many as using blood loss alone (N=1,747), supporting the need to incorporate other diagnostic and treatment data. Blinded chart review revealed our phenotype had 96% sensitivity, 89% precision, 77% specificity, and 89% accuracy to detect PPH. Alternate phenotypes were less accurate, including a common blood loss-based definition (67%) and a previously published digital phenotype (74%).
Conclusion We have developed a scalable, accurate, and valid digital phenotype that may be of significant use for tracking outcomes and ongoing clinical research to deliver better preventative interventions for PPH.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Funding for this study was provided by Sema4, a health intelligence company.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
We received approval from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai Institutional Review Board (IRB-17-01245) to conduct this study.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
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).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data cannot be shared for ethical/privacy reasons.
