Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24448022›Full record

ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2013

Medication-wide association studies.

P B Ryan, D Madigan, P E Stang, M J Schuemie, G Hripcsak

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Tissue-Specific Analysis of Pharmacological Pathways.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2018
    Article
  20. 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

5 authors.

P B RyanJanssen Research and Development, Titusville, New Jersey, USA.
D MadiganDepartment of Statistics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.
P E StangJanssen Research and Development, Titusville, New Jersey, USA.
M J Schuemie1] Janssen Research and Development, Titusville, New Jersey, USA [2] Department of Medical Informatics, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
G HripcsakDepartment of Biomedical Informatics, Columbia University, New York, New York, USA.

Funding

DISCOVERING AND APPLYING KNOWLEDGE IN CLINICAL DATABASESR01LM006910 · NLM · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI HRIPCSAK, GEORGE M · 2000 to 2023
$10.6M
NLM NIH HHS R01 LM006910
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Undiscovered side effects of drugs can have a profound effect on the health of the nation, and electronic health-care databases offer opportunities to speed up the discovery of these side effects. We applied a "medication-wide association study" approach that combined multivariate analysis with exploratory visualization to study four health outcomes of interest in an administrative claims database of 46 million patients and a clinical database of 11 million patients. The technique had good predictive value, but there was no threshold high enough to eliminate false-positive findings. The visualization not only highlighted the class effects that strengthened the review of specific products but also underscored the challenges in confounding. These findings suggest that observational databases are useful for identifying potential associations that warrant further consideration but are unlikely to provide definitive evidence of causal effects.

Identifiers

PMID24448022
PMCPMC4026636

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.