Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29399433›Full record

ReviewCurrent epidemiology reports2017

Administrative Claims Data Versus Augmented Pregnancy Data for the Study of Pharmaceutical Treatments in Pregnancy.

Susan E Andrade, Anick Bérard, Hedvig M E Nordeng, Mollie E Wood, Marleen M H J van Gelder, Sengwee Toh

Erratum issuedAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current epidemiology reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 29 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
29citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

29 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  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. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Susan E Andrade1Meyers Primary Care Institute, Fallon Community Health Plan, Reliant Medical Group, University of Massachusetts Medical School, 425 North Lake Avenue, Worcester, MA 01605 USA.
Anick Bérard2Faculty of Pharmacy, and CHU Ste-Justine Research Center, University of Montreal, 3175 Côte-Ste-Catherine, Montreal, QC H3T 1C5 Canada.
Hedvig M E Nordeng3Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Research Group, School of Pharmacy, PharmaTox Strategic Research Initiative, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1068, Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway.
Mollie E Wood3Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety Research Group, School of Pharmacy, PharmaTox Strategic Research Initiative, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, University of Oslo, P.O. Box 1068, Blindern, 0316 Oslo, Norway.
Marleen M H J van Gelder5Department for Health Evidence, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, P.O. Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Sengwee Toh7Department of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School and Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, 401 Park Drive, Suite 401 East, Boston, MA 02215 USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewAdministrative claims databases, which collect reimbursement-related information generated from healthcare encounters, are increasingly used to evaluate medication safety in pregnancy. We reviewed the strengths and limitations of claims-only databases and how other data sources may be used to improve the accuracy and completeness of information critical for studying medication safety in pregnancy. RECENT

findingsResearch on medication safety in pregnancy requires information on pregnancy episodes, mother-infant linkage, medication exposure, gestational age, maternal and birth outcomes, confounding factors, and (in some studies) long-term follow-up data. Claims data reliably identifies live births and possibly other pregnancies. It allows mother-infant linkage and has prospectively collected prescription medication information. Its diagnosis and procedure information allows estimation of gestational age. It captures maternal medical conditions but generally has incomplete data on reproductive and lifestyle factors. It has information on certain, typically short-term maternal and infant outcomes that may require chart review confirmation. Other data sources including electronic health records and birth registries can augment claims data or be analyzed alone. Interviews, surveys, or biological samples provide additional information. Nationwide and regional birth and pregnancy registries, such as those in several European and North American countries, generally contain more complete information essential for pregnancy research compared to claims-only databases. SUMMARY: Claims data offers several advantages in medication safety in pregnancy research. Its limitations can be partially addressed by linking it with other data sources or supplementing with primary data collection. Rigorous assessment of data quality and completeness is recommended regardless of data sources.

Indexed as

Administrative claims dataBirth registryElectronic health recordsPharmacoepidemiologyPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID29399433
PMCPMC5780544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.