ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2019
Policy-induced selection bias in pharmacoepidemiology: The example of coverage for Alzheimer's medications in British Columbia.
Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Policy-induced selection bias in pharmacoepidemiology: The example of coverage for Alzheimer's medications in British Columbia.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposesTo assess the impact of a government-sponsored reimbursement policy for cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs) on trends in physician visits with a diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD).
methodsLongitudinal population-based study using interrupted time series methods. British Columbia outpatient claims data for individuals aged 65 and older were used to compute monthly AD visit rates and examine the impact of the ChEI reimbursement policy on the coding of AD. We examined trends in the number of patients with AD visits, the number of AD visits per patient, and visits with "competing" diagnoses (mental, neurological, and cerebrovascular disorders and accidental falls). Finally, we described demographic and clinical features of diagnosed patients.
resultsWe analyzed 1.9 million AD visits. Faster growth in recorded AD visits was observed after the policy was implemented, from monthly growth of 7.5 visits per 100 000 person-months before the policy (95% confidence interval [CI], 6.1-8.9) to monthly growth of 16.5 per 100 000 person-months after the policy (95% CI, 14.8-18.3). After the implementation of the policy, we observed increased growth in the number of patients with recorded AD visits and the number of AD visits per patient, as well as a shift in diagnoses away from mental diseases and accidental falls to AD (diagnosis substitution).
conclusionsBritish Columbia's reimbursement policy for ChEIs was associated with a significant acceleration in Alzheimer's visits. Evaluations of health services utilization and clinical outcomes following drug policy changes need to consider policy-induced influences on the reliability of the data used in the analysis.
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.