ArticleInternational journal of technology assessment in health care2025
A method to identify prescription drug targets for health technology reassessment.
Article in International journal of technology assessment in health care, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe simultaneous existence of low-value health care and underutilization of high-value care are global problems. Health technology reassessment (HTR) aims to optimize the value for money of technologies already in use within health care. Identifying candidate interventions for HTR remains challenging. Therefore, we tested a novel method to identify candidate outpatient prescription drugs for HTR through practice variation.
methodsWe used administrative data for all publicly funded outpatient prescriptions dispensed to persons aged 65 or older in Alberta in 2023. Through quantitative comparison of funnel plots for Anatomic Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classes at the fourth level stratified by prescriber specialty, variation in prescription dispensation rates between prescribers was used to estimate three outcomes: the number of prescribers affected, the number of patients affected, and the potential budgetary impact. We ranked combinations of ATC class and prescriber specialty in descending order for each outcome, with use above and below the mean considered separately.
resultsWe analyzed data on 17.5 million dispensations, encompassing more than 8,000 prescribers and approximately 600,000 patients. The top ATC class-prescriber specialty combinations for each outcome showed high similarity above and below control limits while exhibiting minimal overlap between outcomes.
conclusionsOur method successfully identified ATC class-prescriber specialty combinations with marked variation in use, for potential advancement through the HTR process. Depending on the perspective of those undertaking HTR of prescription drugs, different outcomes may be useful in technology prioritization. To make the ATC class-prescriber specialty combinations actionable, future efforts should focus on exploring the patients affected.
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.