ArticleJournal of managed care & specialty pharmacy2019
Accuracy of Prescription Claims Data in Identifying Truly Nonadherent Patients.
Article in Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Adherence to Lipid-Lowering Therapies and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2025 · on this mapPooled it
- Comment on: "Association of osteoporosis treatment with risk of fracture, cardiovascular disease, and all-cause mortality in patients on maintenance dialysis: a retrospective database study using real-world data in Japan".Clinical and experimental nephrology · 2026Article
- Identification of Risk Factors for Glaucoma Progression in Free-Text Clinical Notes Using a Local Large Language Model.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
- Artificial intelligence approaches to predicting treatment non-adherence in chronic diseases: a narrative review.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Review
- Epidemiology, treatment patterns and effectiveness of adherence to Bacillus Calmette-Guérin therapy in intermediate and high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer patients: a retrospective cohort analysis using German health claims data.World journal of urology · 2025Article
- Assessment of Phosphorodiamidate Morpholino Oligomer Treatment Patterns for Patients with Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy: A MarketScan Claims Analysis.Advances in therapy · 2025Article
- Disagreement between pharmacy claims and direct interview to identify patients with non-adherence to chronic cardiometabolic medications.American heart journal · 2023Article
- Comparison of measures of medication adherence from pharmacy dispensing and insurer claims data.Health services research · 2022Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAdministrative claims data are increasingly used to identify nonadherent patients. This necessitates a comprehensive review and assessment of their accuracy in identifying nonadherent patients.
objectivesTo (a) compare administrative claims-based measures of adherence with nonadherence verified by patient interview; (b) determine if and to what extent patients classified as nonadherent based on prescription claims differ from patients classified as nonadherent based on interventions designed to gather multiple types of medication lists to compare against the prescription fill history; and (c) assess the various patient-reported reasons for nonadherence.
methodsA cross-sectional study was used to identify patients from the Southern Piedmont Community Care Network of North Carolina who were enrolled with Medicaid between January 1, 2012, and May 31, 2013, and were using prescription medications for 1 or more chronic conditions. Patients with more than a 30-day gap in refill history were identified using prescription claims and were interviewed by pharmacists to assess the reasons for nonadherence. Based on the patient-reported reasons for a gap in refill, patients were classified as interview-verified nonadherent patients or interview-verified adherent patients. The positive predictive value of prescription claims in identifying nonadherent patients was calculated, and descriptive statistics were reported. Characteristics of interview-verified nonadherent patients were compared with adherent patients using t-tests and chi-square statistics.
results1,425 patients representing 2,936 patient-class of medication combinations were included in the final analysis. 824 (28.07%) of the 2,936 records that were flagged as nonadherent using claims analysis were confirmed as adherent during patient interviews. The positive predictive value of claims records in identifying nonadherent patients was 0.72. The 2 most common reasons for patients to be misclassified as nonadherent in claims data following self-report were discontinuation of medication on prescribers' directions (21.93%) and having an alternate channel for receiving the medication (6.13%). Among interview-verified nonadherent patients, side effects, patient beliefs, education, and socioeconomic barriers were the most common patient-reported reasons for gaps in refill.
conclusionsPrescription claims may underestimate adherence in patients. When interviewed directly by a pharmacist, most patients reported discontinuation of medication as per prescribers' directions. To determine the overall validity of prescription claims data, further analysis is required to assess its accuracy in identifying truly nonadherent patients among those who are identified as nonadherent by claims data. DISCLOSURES: No outside funding supported this study. Glassberg and Wei were employees at Community Care of North Carolina when this research was conducted. Trygstad is an employee of Community Care of North Carolina; Robinson is an employee of Community Care of Southern Piedmont, a subsidiary of Community Care of North Carolina. The geographies, health care professionals, and subjects involved in the study were related to the care coordination work that Community Care of North Carolina was charged with implementing through its informatics and subject matter expertise assistance provided to these local entities to augment primary care activities. Farley has received funding from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American College of Clinical Pharmacy, the National Institutes of Health, and Community Care of North Carolina and has also received consulting funds from UCB. The other authors have nothing additional to report.
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.