Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33079968›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2020

Predicting overdose among individuals prescribed opioids using routinely collected healthcare utilization data.

Jenny W Sun, Jessica M Franklin, Kathryn Rough, Rishi J Desai, Sonia Hernández-Díaz, Krista F Huybrechts, Brian T Bateman

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 18% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Assessing opioid overdose risk: a review of clinical prediction models utilizing patient-level data.Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine · 2021
    Review
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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jenny W SunDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5082-1251
Jessica M FranklinDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Kathryn RoughDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Rishi J DesaiDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Sonia Hernández-DíazDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Krista F HuybrechtsDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Brian T BatemanDivision of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, United States of America.
Brigham and Women's Hospital · USHarvard University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWith increasing rates of opioid overdoses in the US, a surveillance tool to identify high-risk patients may help facilitate early intervention.

objectiveTo develop an algorithm to predict overdose using routinely-collected healthcare databases.

methodsWithin a US commercial claims database (2011-2015), patients with ≥1 opioid prescription were identified. Patients were randomly allocated into the training (50%), validation (25%), or test set (25%). For each month of follow-up, pooled logistic regression was used to predict the odds of incident overdose in the next month based on patient history from the preceding 3-6 months (time-updated), using elastic net for variable selection. As secondary analyses, we explored whether using simpler models (few predictors, baseline only) or different analytic methods (random forest, traditional regression) influenced performance.

resultsWe identified 5,293,880 individuals prescribed opioids; 2,682 patients (0.05%) had an overdose during follow-up (mean: 17.1 months). On average, patients who overdosed were younger and had more diagnoses and prescriptions. The elastic net model achieved good performance (c-statistic 0.887, 95% CI 0.872-0.902; sensitivity 80.2, specificity 80.1, PPV 0.21, NPV 99.9 at optimal cutpoint). It outperformed simpler models based on few predictors (c-statistic 0.825, 95% CI 0.808-0.843) and baseline predictors only (c-statistic 0.806, 95% CI 0.787-0.26). Different analytic techniques did not substantially influence performance. In the final algorithm based on elastic net, the strongest predictors were age 18-25 years (OR: 2.21), prior suicide attempt (OR: 3.68), opioid dependence (OR: 3.14).

conclusionsWe demonstrate that sophisticated algorithms using healthcare databases can be predictive of overdose, creating opportunities for active monitoring and early intervention.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAnalgesics, OpioidDrug OverdoseDrug PrescriptionsFacilities and Services UtilizationFemaleHealth ServicesHumansInsurance Claim ReviewMaleMiddle AgedOpioid-Related DisordersPractice Patterns, Physicians'Risk AssessmentAnalgesics, Opioid

Identifiers

PMID33079968
PMCPMC7575098
OpenAlexW3094046789

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.