Observational studyHealth services research2021
Congruence of opioid prescriptions and dispensing using electronic records and claims data.
Observational study in Health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Role of gender, age and rurality in benzodiazepine consumption in Catalonia, 2018-2022: a retrospective longitudinal drug utilisation study.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Concordance of opioid exposure in all-payer claims databases with prescription drug monitoring program database using Arkansas as a case example.Health services research · 2023Article
- Congruence of opioid prescriptions and dispensing using electronic records and claims data.Health services research · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo quantify discrepancies between opioid prescribing and dispensing via the percentage of patients with Electronic Medical Record (EMR) prescriptions who subsequently filled the prescription within 90 days, defined as congruence, and compared opioid congruence with related medications. DATA SOURCES: Deidentified data from the IBM MarketScan Explorys Claims-EMR Dataset. STUDY
designIn this retrospective, observational study, we examined congruence for commonly prescribed controlled substances-opioids, stimulants, and benzodiazepines. Congruence was stratified by age group and sex. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION
methodsContinuously enrolled adults aged 18-64 years with an EMR encounter (excluding inpatient settings) and ≥ 1 prescription for selected classes between 1/1/2016 and 10/2/2017. PRINCIPAL
findingsDuring the study period, 1,353,478 adults had ≥1 EMR encounter. Patients with stimulants prescriptions had the highest congruence (83%) corresponding to 7151 claims for 8,635 EMR prescriptions, followed by opioids (66%; 62,766/95,690) and benzodiazepines (64%; 30,181/47,408). Chi-square testing showed congruence differed by age group within opioids (P < .0001) and benzodiazepines (P < .0001) and was higher among females within benzodiazepines (P < .0001).
conclusionsThese findings demonstrate that relying on claims data alone for opioid prescribing measures might underestimate actual prescribing magnitude by as much as one-third in these data. Combined EMR and claims data can help future research better understand characteristics associated with congruence or incongruence between prescribing and dispensing.
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.