Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37074763›Full record

ArticleJMIR medical informatics2023

Data-Driven Identification of Unusual Prescribing Behavior: Analysis and Use of an Interactive Data Tool Using 6 Months of Primary Care Data From 6500 Practices in England.

Lisa Em Hopcroft, Jon Massey, Helen J Curtis, Brian Mackenna, Richard Croker, Andrew D Brown, Thomas O'Dwyer, Orla Macdonald, David Evans, Peter Inglesby and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR medical informatics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

13 authors.

Lisa Em HopcroftBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7022-1322
Jon MasseyBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2497-4040
Helen J CurtisBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3429-9576
Brian MackennaBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3786-9063
Richard CrokerBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8114-9186
Andrew D BrownBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3688-8393
Thomas O'DwyerBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4373-1597
Orla MacdonaldOxford Health NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2774-0001
David EvansBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1100-079X
Peter InglesbyBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7784-1719
Sebastian Cj BaconBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6354-3454
Ben GoldacreBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5127-4728
Alex J WalkerBennett Institute for Applied Data Science, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4932-6135

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundApproaches to addressing unwarranted variation in health care service delivery have traditionally relied on the prospective identification of activities and outcomes, based on a hypothesis, with subsequent reporting against defined measures. Practice-level prescribing data in England are made publicly available by the National Health Service (NHS) Business Services Authority for all general practices. There is an opportunity to adopt a more data-driven approach to capture variability and identify outliers by applying hypothesis-free, data-driven algorithms to national data sets.

objectiveThis study aimed to develop and apply a hypothesis-free algorithm to identify unusual prescribing behavior in primary care data at multiple administrative levels in the NHS in England and to visualize these results using organization-specific interactive dashboards, thereby demonstrating proof of concept for prioritization approaches.

methodsHere we report a new data-driven approach to quantify how "unusual" the prescribing rates of a particular chemical within an organization are as compared to peer organizations, over a period of 6 months (June-December 2021). This is followed by a ranking to identify which chemicals are the most notable outliers in each organization. These outlying chemicals are calculated for all practices, primary care networks, clinical commissioning groups, and sustainability and transformation partnerships in England. Our results are presented via organization-specific interactive dashboards, the iterative development of which has been informed by user feedback.

resultsWe developed interactive dashboards for every practice (n=6476) in England, highlighting the unusual prescribing of 2369 chemicals (dashboards are also provided for 42 sustainability and transformation partnerships, 106 clinical commissioning groups, and 1257 primary care networks). User feedback and internal review of case studies demonstrate that our methodology identifies prescribing behavior that sometimes warrants further investigation or is a known issue.

conclusionsData-driven approaches have the potential to overcome existing biases with regard to the planning and execution of audits, interventions, and policy making within NHS organizations, potentially revealing new targets for improved health care service delivery. We present our dashboards as a proof of concept for generating candidate lists to aid expert users in their interpretation of prescribing data and prioritize further investigations and qualitative research in terms of potential targets for improved performance.

Indexed as

dashboarddata scienceEHRelectronic health recordsgeneral practiceoutliersprescribingprimary care

Identifiers

PMID37074763
PMCPMC10162592

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.