6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Validation of a claims-based algorithm identifying eligible study subjects in the ADAPTABLE pragmatic clinical trial

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objective

          Validate an algorithm that uses administrative claims data to identify eligible study subjects for the ADAPTABLE (Aspirin Dosing: A Patient-centric Trial Assessing Benefits and Long-Term Effectiveness) pragmatic clinical trial (PCT).

          Materials and methods

          This study used medical records from a random sample of patients identified as eligible for the ADAPTABLE trial. The inclusion criteria for ADAPTABLE were a history of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), or other coronary artery disease (CAD), plus at least one of several risk-enrichment factors. Exclusion criteria included a history of bleeding disorders or aspirin allergy. Using a claims-based algorithm, based on International Classification of Diseases, 9th Edition, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and 10th Edition (ICD-10) codes and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes, we identified patients eligible for the PCT. The primary outcome was the positive predictive value (PPV) of the identification algorithm: the proportion of sampled patients whose medical records confirmed their ADAPTABLE study eligibility. Exact 95% confidence limits for binomial random variables were calculated for the PPV estimates.

          Results

          Of the 185 patients whose medical records were reviewed, 168 (90.8%; 95% Confidence Interval: 85.7%, 94.6%) were confirmed study eligible. This proportion did not differ between patients identified with codes for AMI and patients identified with codes for PCI or CABG.

          Conclusion

          The estimated PPV was similar to those in claims-based identification of drug safety surveillance events, indicating that administrative claims data can accurately identify study-eligible subjects for pragmatic clinical trials.

          Related collections

          Most cited references14

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Beyond the randomized clinical trial: the role of effectiveness studies in evaluating cardiovascular therapies.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Good Clinical Practice Guidance and Pragmatic Clinical Trials: Balancing the Best of Both Worlds.

            Randomized, clinical trials are commonly regarded as the highest level of evidence to support clinical decisions. Good Clinical Practice guidelines have been constructed to provide an ethical and scientific quality standard for trials that involve human subjects in a manner aligned with the Declaration of Helsinki. Originally designed to provide a unified standard of trial data to support submission to regulatory authorities, the principles may also be applied to other studies of human subjects. Although the application of Good Clinical Practice principles generally led to improvements in the quality and consistency of trial operations, these principles have also contributed to increasing trial complexity and costs. Alternatively, the growing availability of electronic health record data has facilitated the possibility for streamlined pragmatic clinical trials. The central tenets of Good Clinical Practice and pragmatic clinical trials represent potential tensions in trial design (stringent quality and highly efficient operations). In the present article, we highlight potential areas of discordance between Good Clinical Practice guidelines and the principles of pragmatic clinical trials and suggest strategies to streamline study conduct in an ethical manner to optimally perform clinical trials in the electronic age.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Validation of acute myocardial infarction in the Food and Drug Administration's Mini-Sentinel program.

              To validate an algorithm based upon International Classification of Diseases, 9(th) revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) documented within the Mini-Sentinel Distributed Database (MSDD). Using an ICD-9-CM-based algorithm (hospitalized patients with 410.x0 or 410.x1 in primary position), we identified a random sample of potential cases of AMI in 2009 from four Data Partners participating in the Mini-Sentinel Program. Cardiologist reviewers used information abstracted from hospital records to assess the likelihood of an AMI diagnosis based on criteria from the Joint European Society of Cardiology and American College of Cardiology Global Task Force. Positive predictive values (PPVs) of the ICD-9-based algorithm were calculated. Of the 153 potential cases of AMI identified, hospital records for 143 (93%) were retrieved and abstracted. Overall, the PPV was 86.0% (95% confidence interval; 79.2%, 91.2%). PPVs ranged from 76.3% to 94.3% across the four Data Partners. The overall PPV of potential AMI cases, as identified using an ICD-9-CM-based algorithm, may be acceptable for safety surveillance; however, PPVs do vary across Data Partners. This validation effort provides a contemporary estimate of the reliability of this algorithm for use in future surveillance efforts conducted using the Food and Drug Administration's MSDD. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Contemp Clin Trials Commun
                Contemp Clin Trials Commun
                Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
                Elsevier
                2451-8654
                10 November 2018
                December 2018
                10 November 2018
                : 12
                : 154-160
                Affiliations
                [a ]HealthCore, Inc., Wilmington, DE, USA
                [b ]Duke Clinical Research Institute, Durham, NC, USA
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. HealthCore, Inc. 123 Justison Street, Suite 200, Wilmington, DE 19801, USA. efishman@ 123456healthcore.com
                Article
                S2451-8654(18)30118-2
                10.1016/j.conctc.2018.11.001
                6240793
                30480162
                02077ab2-a85a-453d-9c68-e9df7e466523
                © 2018 The Authors

                This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 15 August 2018
                : 29 October 2018
                : 5 November 2018
                Categories
                Article

                cardiovascular disease,aspirin,real-world evidence,acute myocardial infarction,computable phenotype

                Comments

                Comment on this article