Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40607704›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2025

Evaluating the generalizability of commercial healthcare claims data.

Alex Dahlen, Yaowei Deng, Vivek Charu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Alex DahlenDepartment of Biostatistics, School of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7911-6203
Yaowei DengQuantitative Sciences Unit, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID 0009-0006-3765-5694
Vivek CharuQuantitative Sciences Unit, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7147-9026

Funding

Stanford Center for Clinical & Translational Education and Research (Spectrum)UL1TR003142 · NCATS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI O'HARA, RUTH M · 2019 to 2023
$45.0M
Stanford Islet Research CoreP30DK116074 · NIDDK · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI Seung K Kim · 2017 to 2026
$19.5M
Institutional Career Development Core (KL2)KL2TR003143 · NCATS · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI ASCH, STEVEN M. · 2019 to 2023
$8.7M
KL2TR003143National Institutes of Health National Center for Advancing Translational Science Clinical and Translational Science Award UL1TR003142NCATS NIH HHS KL2 TR003143NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR003142NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK116074P30DK116074
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Commercial healthcare claims datasets area nonrandom sample of the US population, affecting generalizability. Rigorous comparisons of claims-derived results to ground-truth data that quantify external validity bias are lacking. Our goal is to (1) quantify external validity of commercial healthcare claims data and (2) to evaluate how socioeconomic/demographic factors are related to the bias. We analyzed inpatient discharge records occurring between January 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019 in five states: California, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New Jersey, and compared rates (per person-year) of the 250 most common inpatient procedures between claims and reference data for each target population. We used Merative MarketScan Commercial Database for the claims data and State Inpatient Databases and the US Census as reference. For a target population of all Americans, commercial healthcare claims underestimate the rate of overall inpatient discharges by 23.1%. The extent of bias varied across procedures, with the rates of ~25% of procedures being underestimated by a factor of 2. Socioeconomic factors were significantly associated with the magnitude of bias (${R}^2=69.4\%,$P < .001). When the target population was restricted to commercially insured Americans, the bias decreased substantially (1.4% of procedures were biased by more than factor of 2), but some variation across procedures remained.

Indexed as

Insurance Claim ReviewInsurance, HealthAdultAgedBiasDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient DischargeSocioeconomic FactorsUnited Stateselectronic healthcare records datageneralizabilityhealthcare claims data

Identifiers

PMID40607704
PMCPMC12527232

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.