ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2016
Validation of low-dose aspirin prescription data in The Health Improvement Network: how much misclassification due to over-the-counter use?
Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nondifferential Treatment Misclassification Biases Toward the Null? Not a Safe Bet for Active Comparator Studies.American journal of epidemiology · 2022Article
- Antithrombotic Treatment Patterns of Patients with Symptomatic Peripheral Arterial Occlusive Disease in Germany: Evidence from Health Insurance Claims Data.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Public health impact of low-dose aspirin on colorectal cancer, cardiovascular disease and safety in the UK - Results from micro-simulation model.International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2021Article
- Real-World Anticoagulatory Treatment After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Retrospective, Observational Study on 4,800 Patients.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Article
- Low-dose aspirin and risk of gastric and oesophageal cancer: A population-based study in the United Kingdom using The Health Improvement Network.International journal of cancer · 2020Article
- Feasibility study to identify women of childbearing age at risk of pregnancy not using any contraception in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) database.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- Effect of Proton Pump Inhibitors on Risks of Upper and Lower Gastrointestinal Bleeding among Users of Low-Dose Aspirin: A Population-Based Observational Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
- A Novel Approach to Visualize Risk Minimization Effectiveness: Peeping at the 2012 UK Proton Pump Inhibitor Label Change Using a Rapid Cycle Analysis Tool.Drug safety · 2019Article
- Low-dose aspirin and risk of upper/lower gastrointestinal bleeding by bleed severity: a cohort study with nested case-control analysis using primary care electronic health records from the United Kingdom.Annals of medicine · 2019Article
- Exposure measurement error when assessing current glucocorticoid use using UK primary care electronic prescription data.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2019Article
- Contemporary Primary Prevention Aspirin Use by Cardiovascular Disease Risk: Impact of US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations, 2007-2015: A Serial, Cross-sectional Study.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017Article
- New use of low-dose aspirin and risk of colorectal cancer by stage at diagnosis: a nested case-control study in UK general practice.BMC cancer · 2017Article
- Validation of low-dose aspirin prescription data in The Health Improvement Network: how much misclassification due to over-the-counter use?Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2016Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to quantify the extent of over-the-counter (OTC) low-dose aspirin use among patients in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) in the UK.
methodsIn September 2013, a random sample of low-dose aspirin users (75 past users and 75 never users) was identified based on prescriptions recorded in THIN. Primary care practitioners (PCPs) were sent questionnaires to provide information on patients' use of OTC low-dose aspirin.
resultsOne hundred and forty valid questionnaires were received (93.30% [95%CI: 88.16-96.34] response rate). Current use of low-dose aspirin was reported by PCPs in 4.23% (95%CI: 1.45-11.70) (n = 3) of past users (OTC use in one patient) and in 2.9% (95%CI: 0.78-9.70) (n = 2) of never users (OTC use in one patient). In addition, PCPs reported past use of low-dose aspirin in 88.70% (95%CI: 79.31-94.18) (n = 63) of past users (all prescribed; none as OTC) and in 2.82% (95%CI: 0.78-9.70) (n = 2) of never users (as OTC). Among past users, PCPs reported the indication for low-dose aspirin as primary cardiovascular disease (CVD) prevention in 63.16% (95%CI: 50.18-74.48) of patients and secondary CVD prevention in 31.58% (95%CI: 21.00-44.48) of patients. Corresponding percentages based on THIN were 78.95% (95%CI: 66.71-87.53) and 21.1% (95%CI: 12.47-33.29), respectively.
conclusionOur findings show the small impact of potential misclassification of low-dose aspirin use in THIN due to unrecorded OTC use. The small proportion of false negatives confirms the utility of THIN for utilization and outcome studies of low-dose aspirin.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.