Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29619668›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2018

Performing studies using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink: to link or not to link?

Laura McDonald, Anna Schultze, Robert Carroll, Sreeram V Ramagopalan

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Association between Inhaled βInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

4 authors.

Laura McDonaldCentre for Observational Research and Data Sciences, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Uxbridge, UB8 1DH, UK.
Anna SchultzeReal-World Evidence, Evidera, London, W6 8DL, UK.
Robert CarrollReal-World Evidence, Evidera, London, W6 8DL, UK.
Sreeram V RamagopalanCentre for Observational Research and Data Sciences, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Uxbridge, UB8 1DH, UK. sreeram.ramagopalan@bms.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4766-5160

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) is a repository of electronic medical records collected during routine primary care clinical practice in the UK, and is one of the most widely used sources of real-world data for healthcare research. Although CPRD provides access to comprehensive longitudinal patient records, the data does not fully capture diagnoses or outcomes occurring in secondary care and/or mortality. We provide here an overview of CPRD and the potential bias when using unlinked data in certain situations. Linkage of CPRD to other datasets can help to overcome these limitations. We discuss when to consider linkage to secondary care, disease-specific data sources or the official mortality data when conducting research using CPRD data.

Indexed as

Biomedical ResearchDatabases, FactualInformation Storage and RetrievalPrimary Health CareElectronic Health RecordsHumansSecondary Health CareUnited KingdomCPRDData linkageEpidemiologyHESPrimary careSecondary care

Identifiers

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.