ArticlePharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2025
Estimation of the Duration of Antihypertensive Prescriptions: Validation of a Data-Driven Approach Using Rotterdam Study Data.
Article in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesAdministrative medicine dispensing data often omit prescribed duration, which is important for research on adherence or other pharmacoepidemiological topics. While the reverse waiting time distribution (rWTD) method has been widely used to estimate prescribed durations, its accuracy in real-world dispensing data is unknown. We assessed the performance of the rWTD method against the actual prescribed duration recorded in the Rotterdam Study.
methods100 725 antihypertensive (AHT) prescriptions from 2018 to 2019 were extracted from the Rotterdam Study's medicine data. Data were constructed into five scenarios with increasing variability in the number of medicines included and variations in prescribed duration. The rWTD with 10 random index dates with or without adjustment for the quantity of dispensed medicine was conducted in all scenarios. Relative differences and limit of agreement ratio based on Bland-Altman analysis were used to examine agreement between estimated and actual prescribed durations.
resultsrWTD models without adjustment for the quantity of dispensed medicine performed well only in the most homogenous scenario. In scenarios with greater data variability, performance improved significantly when adjusted for the quantity of dispensed medicine. Relative difference decreased from ≥ 65% in models without covariates to ≤ 20% with covariates, and the limit of agreement ratio decreased from ≥ 36.8 in models without covariates to ≤ 5.3 with covariates. Stratification analysis by subclass of the AHT medicines provided similar results.
conclusionsThe study demonstrated that as data variability increased, the accuracy of the rWTD estimations decreased. However, the rWTD can produce good estimates (relative difference from 0% to 28%) of prescribed duration for AHT medicines, with the highest accuracy in the model adjusting for the quantity of dispensed medicine or stratification of the data with a relative difference less than 20% and the limit of agreement ratio less than 5.3 for the estimation at the 90th percentile of inter-arrival density. Since this validation was limited to antihypertensive medicines, generalizing the finding to other chronic-use medicines should be undertaken with caution.
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.