Literature DB >> 17419964

Self-reported information and pharmacy claims were comparable for lipid-lowering medication exposure.

David W Brown1, Robert F Anda, Vincent J Felitti.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine agreement between self-reported exposure to lipid-lowering medications and objective evidence of filling prescribed lipid-lowering medications. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: Using data from 7,918 adults from the Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study, we calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and positive (PV+) and negative (PV-) predictive values, and likelihood ratios for self-reported exposure to lipid-lowering medications compared to exposure obtained from pharmacy claims (gold standard) both overall and by age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, and ACE Score.
RESULTS: Eight percent (n=655) of adults self-reported lipid-lowering medication exposure, and 379 adults filled at least one lipid-lowering prescription within 60 days of the baseline exam during 1997. The sensitivity of self-reported exposure was nearly 94%; the specificity was 96%; the PV+ was 54%; and the PV- was nearly 100%. Values for sensitivity, specificity, PV+, and PV- were similar across participant characteristics.
CONCLUSION: A self-reported measure of lipid-lowering medication exposure was accurate with high sensitivity and specificity while the PV+ of self-reported lipid-lowering medication exposure was relatively low. These findings suggest that self-reported exposure to lipid-lowering medications may be useful in surveys that examine the prevalence of hyperlipidemia, but may overestimate actual exposure in studies monitoring trends in use of lipid-lowering medications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17419964     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.08.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  8 in total

1.  Agreement between self-reported and pharmacy data on medication use in the Northern Finland 1966 Birth Cohort.

Authors:  Marianne Haapea; Jouko Miettunen; Sari Lindeman; Matti Joukamaa; Hannu Koponen
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 4.035

2.  Comparison of Pharmacy Database Methods for Determining Prevalent Chronic Medication Use.

Authors:  Timothy S Anderson; Bocheng Jing; Charlie M Wray; Sarah Ngo; Edison Xu; Kathy Fung; Michael A Steinman
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2019-10       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  A systematic review of methods for determining cross-sectional active medications using pharmacy databases.

Authors:  Timothy S Anderson; Edison Xu; Evans Whitaker; Michael A Steinman
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2019-02-13       Impact factor: 2.890

4.  Patterns and predictors of lipid-lowering therapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and/or diabetes mellitus in 2014: Insights from a large US managed-care population.

Authors:  Dylan L Steen; Irfan Khan; Laura Becker; JoAnne M Foody; Katherine Gorcyca; Robert J Sanchez; Robert P Giugliano
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2016-12-27       Impact factor: 2.882

Review 5.  A systematic review of medication exposure assessment in prospective cohort studies of community dwelling older australians.

Authors:  Susan G Poole; J Simon Bell; Natali Jokanovic; Carl M Kirkpatrick; Michael J Dooley
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-04-24       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Real-world clinical and economic outcomes of liraglutide versus sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United States.

Authors:  Qian Li; Abhishek Chitnis; Mette Hammer; Jakob Langer
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 2.945

7.  Medication documentation in a primary care network serving North Carolina medicaid patients: results of a cross-sectional chart review.

Authors:  Matthew D Olson; Gretchen L Tong; Beat D Steiner; Anthony J Viera; Evan Ashkin; Warren P Newton
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2012-08-13       Impact factor: 2.497

8.  Real-world cost-effectiveness: lower cost of treating patients to glycemic goal with liraglutide versus exenatide.

Authors:  Mitch DeKoven; Won Chan Lee; Jonathan Bouchard; Marjan Massoudi; Jakob Langer
Journal:  Adv Ther       Date:  2014-01-30       Impact factor: 3.845

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.