ArticleDrugs - real world outcomes2022
Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics in a Prescription Claims Data Source: A Validation Study.
Article in Drugs - real world outcomes, 2022. 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.
- Second-Generation Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics and the Risk of Treatment Failure in a Population-Based Cohort.Frontiers in pharmacology · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effectiveness of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIAs) has been demonstrated in studies using prescription claims data. However, the validity of claims data for LAIAs has not been established.
objectiveWe aimed to validate date dispensed, quantity dispensed and days supplied fields in prescription claims data, and to compare claims- and medical record-derived persistence estimates.
methodsWe evaluated LAIA dispensations in the Drug Programs Information Network prescription claims database from Manitoba, Canada against a random sample of medical records. Adults with one or more LAIA prescription between April 2015 and March 2016 were eligible. Results were stratified by LAIA type (first-generation LAIA, risperidone LAI or paliperidone LAI). Persistence estimates were assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and proportion of patients covered method.
resultsClaims data had high positive predictive value, ranging from 80.0% (95% CI 51.9-95.7) to 100.0% (95% CI 89.7-100.0), but low negative predictive value, ranging from 0.0% (95% CI 0.0-2.5) to 62.5% (95% CI 40.6-81.2). Quantity dispensed and days supplied exactly matched dose and dosing interval, respectively, for 99.7% and 97.1% of risperidone LAI doses, 100.0% and 76.6% of paliperidone doses, and 8.9% and 28.3% of first-generation LAIA doses. There were no significant differences in claims-derived versus medical record-derived persistence estimates.
conclusionsQuantity dispensed and days supplied provide valid estimates of dose and dosing interval for second-generation LAIAs, but underestimated these parameters for first-generation LAIAs. However, a large proportion of medical record-confirmed doses were missing from claims data, and dose and dosing interval are underestimated in claims data.
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.