ArticleCMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne1996
A survey of population-based drug databases in Canada.
Article in CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne, 1996. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The safety of meperidine prescribing in older adults: A longitudinal population-based study.BMC geriatrics · 2016Article
- Agreement between administrative data and the Resident Assessment Instrument Minimum Dataset (RAI-MDS) for medication use in long-term care facilities: a population-based study.BMC geriatrics · 2015Article
- Association between risk factors for injurious falls and new benzodiazepine prescribing in elderly persons.BMC family practice · 2009Article
- A cross-national study of the persistence of antihypertensive medication use in the elderly.Journal of hypertension · 2008Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo identify the population-based drug databases in Canada and to determine their comprehensiveness and accessibility for performing pharmacoepidemiologic and outcomes research.
designSurvey (four-part mailed questionnaire).
settingPublic and private third-party drug plans across Canada.
participantsAll provincial and territorial drug plan or pharmacare managers as well as selected private plan managers including health benefit consultants, group insurers and claims adjudicators/pharmacy benefit managers (CA/PBMs). OUTCOME MEASURES: Patient, drug and pharmacy information; potential for electronic linkages to other provincial databases (e.g., physician, hospital, vital statistics); accessibility of information; population profile.
resultsOf the 32 recipients of the questionnaire 29 (91%) responded and 18 (56%) completed the survey. Most databases were reported to contain patient information (e.g., patient identification number, age, sex and medication history) and prescription drug information (e.g., drug identification number, strength, quantity and cost). Six provinces and one territory reported the capability to link to other databases (e.g., hospital and physician databases). One CA/PBM reported some links to selected long-term disability data. All of the government databases except those in British Columbia and the Yukon Territory allowed use of the data for research purposes. Manitoba and Saskatchewan included all residents of the province in their database; the others included selected groups (e.g., residents 65 years of age or older, people on social assistance or people covered by private group insurance).
conclusionA number of public and private population-based databases are available for use in pharmacoepidemiologic and outcomes research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
8653645PMC1487738What 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.