ArticleContemporary clinical trials communications2018
Validation of a claims-based algorithm identifying eligible study subjects in the ADAPTABLE pragmatic clinical trial.
Article in Contemporary clinical trials communications, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Effectiveness of Aspirin Dosing in Cardiovascular Disease.The New England journal of medicine · 2021Trial
- The Healthcare Integrated Research Database (HIRD) as a Real-World Data Source for Pharmacoepidemiologic Research.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2025Article
- Pragmatic guidance for embedding pragmatic clinical trials in health plans: Large simple trials aren't so simple.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Out-of-Pocket Costs and Treatment Intensification With an SGLT2 Inhibitor or GLP-1 RA in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease.JAMA network open · 2023Article
- Lipid-Lowering Therapy Use and Intensification Among United States Veterans Following Myocardial Infarction or Coronary Revascularization Between 2015 and 2019.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2022Article
- Tofacitinib Treatment Safety in Moderate to Severe Ulcerative Colitis: Comparison of Observational Population Cohort Data From the IBM MarketScan® Administrative Claims Database With Tofacitinib Trial Data.Inflammatory bowel diseases · 2021Article
- Particulate Air Pollution and Risk of Cardiovascular Events Among Adults With a History of Stroke or Acute Myocardial Infarction.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2021Article
- Contemporary use of real-world data for clinical trial conduct in the United States: a scoping review.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2021Article
- Comparative Risk of Incident Coronary Heart Disease Across Chronic Inflammatory Diseases.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2021Article
- Differential Associations of Chronic Inflammatory Diseases With Incident Heart Failure.JACC. Heart failure · 2020Article
- Computable Phenotype Implementation for a National, Multicenter Pragmatic Clinical Trial: Lessons Learned From ADAPTABLE.Circulation. Cardiovascular quality and outcomes · 2020Article
- Long-Term Outcomes of Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Among Medicare Beneficiaries.Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & InterventionsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveValidate an algorithm that uses administrative claims data to identify eligible study subjects for the ADAPTABLE (Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness) pragmatic clinical trial (PCT). MATERIALS AND
methodsThis study used medical records from a random sample of patients identified as eligible for the ADAPTABLE trial. The inclusion criteria for ADAPTABLE were a history of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), or other coronary artery disease (CAD), plus at least one of several risk-enrichment factors. Exclusion criteria included a history of bleeding disorders or aspirin allergy. Using a claims-based algorithm, based on International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and 10th Edition (ICD-10) codes and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, we identified patients eligible for the PCT. The primary outcome was the positive predictive value (PPV) of the identification algorithm: the proportion of sampled patients whose medical records confirmed their ADAPTABLE study eligibility. Exact 95% confidence limits for binomial random variables were calculated for the PPV estimates.
resultsOf the 185 patients whose medical records were reviewed, 168 (90.8%; 95% Confidence Interval: 85.7%, 94.6%) were confirmed study eligible. This proportion did not differ between patients identified with codes for AMI and patients identified with codes for PCI or CABG.
conclusionThe estimated PPV was similar to those in claims-based identification of drug safety surveillance events, indicating that administrative claims data can accurately identify study-eligible subjects for pragmatic clinical trials.
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.