ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2022
Considerations for observational study design: Comparing the evidence of opioid use between electronic health records and insurance claims.
Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complexities and approaches for deriving longitudinal daily morphine milligram equivalents using electronic health record prescription data.JAMIA open · 2025Article
- Data quality considerations for evaluating COVID-19 treatments using real world data: learnings from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C).BMC medical research methodology · 2023Article
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
Abstract
purposePharmacoepidemiology studies often use insurance claims and/or electronic health records (EHR) to capture information about medication exposure. The choice between these data sources has important implications.
methodsWe linked EHR from a large academic health system (2015-2017) to Medicare insurance claims for patients undergoing surgery. Drug utilization was characterized based on medication order dates in the EHR, and prescription fill dates in Medicare claims. We compared opioid use documented in EHR orders to prescription claims in four time periods: 1) Baseline (182 days before surgery); 2) Perioperative period; 3) Discharge date; 4) Follow-up (90 days after surgery).
resultsWe identified 11 128 patients undergoing surgery. During baseline, 34.4% (EHR) versus 44.1% (claims) had evidence of opioid use, and 56.9% of all baseline use was reflected only in one data source. During the perioperative period, 78.8% (EHR) versus 47.6% (claims) had evidence of use. On the day of discharge, 59.6% (EHR) versus 45.5% (claims) had evidence of use, and 51.8% of all discharge use was reflected only in one data source. During follow-up, 4.3% (EHR) versus 10.4% (claims) were identified with prolonged opioid use following surgery with 81.4% of all prolonged use reflected only in one data source.
conclusionsWhen characterizing opioid exposure, we found substantial discrepancies between EHR medication orders and prescription claims data. In all time periods assessed, most patients' use was reflected only in the EHR, or only in the claims, not both. The potential for misclassification of drug utilization must be evaluated carefully, and choice of data source may have large impacts on key study design elements.
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.