Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23696101›Full record

ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2013

Completeness of prescription information in US commercial claims databases.

Julie C Lauffenburger, Akhila Balasubramanian, Joel F Farley, Cathy W Critchlow, Cynthia D O'Malley, Mary T Roth, Virginia Pate, M Alan Brookhart

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 47 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
47citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

47 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Development of an algorithm to link electronic health record prescriptions with pharmacy dispense claims.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2018
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Julie C LauffenburgerDivision of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Akhila Balasubramanian
Joel F Farley
Cathy W Critchlow
Cynthia D O'Malley
Mary T Roth
Virginia Pate
M Alan Brookhart
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USAmgen (United States) · US

Funding

Research Training:Health Care Quality &Patient OutcomesT32NR008856 · NINR · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI MARK, BARBARA A · 2004 to 2013
$2.7M
NINR NIH HHS T32 NR008856
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePharmacy commercial claims databases are widely used for pharmacoepidemiologic research. However, concerns have been raised that these databases may not fully capture claims for generic medications as a result of patients filling outside the context of their insurance. This has implications for many research activities and quality improvement programs. We sought to estimate the percentage of missing prescriptions in US commercial claims data using a novel design.

methodsUsing a large US commercial insurance database, we examined the completeness of warfarin prescription claims among patients with atrial fibrillation receiving regular medical follow-up and testing to manage warfarin dosing. We examined 14 different 6-month cross sections. Each cross section was treated independently to identify patients with at least two outpatient diagnoses of atrial fibrillation, two international normalized ratio tests, and one pharmacy claim. Trends in the percentage of patients with prescription claims for generic and branded warfarin were compared by year and 6-month periods using chi-square tests and generalized linear models adjusting for patient characteristics.

resultsOut of 111 170 patients, the percentage of patients with any warfarin drug decreased slightly from 91.7% (95% CI: 91.0, 92.4) in early 2003 to 87.1% (95% CI: 86.7-87.6) in late 2009 (χ(2)  = 93.8, p < 0.0001). Over the same interval, the proportion of patients with generic warfarin exposure appearing increased significantly, whereas the proportion of patients with branded warfarin exposure decreased significantly.

conclusionsOur study supports the possibility that some prescriptions may not be captured in US commercial insurance databases.

Indexed as

AnticoagulantsAtrial FibrillationChi-Square DistributionCross-Sectional StudiesDatabases, FactualDrug MonitoringDrugs, GenericFemaleHumansInsurance, Pharmaceutical ServicesInternational Normalized RatioLinear ModelsMaleMiddle AgedPharmacoepidemiologyPrescription DrugsAnticoagulantsDrugs, GenericPrescription DrugsWarfarinclaims datadata qualitygeneric drugspharmacoepidemiology

Identifiers

PMID23696101
PMCPMC4012425
OpenAlexW1792185308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.