High-Throughput Computing to Automate Population-Based Studies to Detect the 30-Day Risk of Adverse Outcomes After New Outpatient Medication Use in Older Adults with Chronic Kidney Disease: A Clinical Research Protocol
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background:Safety issues are detected in about one third of prescription drugs in the years following regulatory agency approval. Older adults, especially those with chronic kidney disease, are at particular risk of adverse reactions to prescription drugs. This protocol describes a new approach that may identify credible drug-safety signals more efficiently using administrative health care data.Objective:To use high-throughput computing and automation to conduct 700+ drug-safety cohort studies in older adults in Ontario, Canada. Each study will compare 74 acute (30-day) outcomes in patients who start a new prescription drug (new users) to a group of nonusers with similar baseline health characteristics. Risks will be assessed within strata of baseline kidney function.Design and setting:The studies will be population-based, new-user cohort studies conducted using linked administrative health care databases in Ontario, Canada (January 1, 2008, to March 1, 2020). The source population for these studies will be residents of Ontario aged 66 years or older who filled at least one outpatient prescription through the Ontario Drug Benefit (ODB) program during the study period (all residents have universal health care, and those aged 65+ have universal prescription drug coverage through the ODB).Patients:We identified 3.2 million older adults in the source population during the study period and built 700+ initial medication cohorts, each containing mutually exclusive groups of new users and nonusers. Nonusers were randomly assigned cohort entry dates that followed the same distribution of prescription start dates as new users. Eligibility criteria included a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) measurement within 12 months before the cohort entry date (median time was 71 days before cohort entry in the new user group), no prior receipt of maintenance dialysis or a kidney transplant, and no prior prescriptions for drugs in the same subclass as the study drug. New users and nonusers will be balanced on ~400 baseline health characteristics using inverse probability of treatment weighting on propensity scores within 3 strata of baseline eGFR: ≥60, 45 to <60, <45 mL/min per 1.73 m<sup>2</sup>.Outcomes:We will compare new user and nonuser groups on 74 clinically relevant outcomes (17 composites and 57 individual outcomes) in the 30 days after cohort entry. We used a prespecified approach to identify these 74 outcomes.Statistical analysis plan:In each cohort, we will obtain eGFR-stratum-specific weighted risk ratios and risk differences using modified Poisson regression and binomial regression, respectively. Additive and multiplicative interaction by eGFR category will be examined. Drug-outcome associations that meet prespecified criteria (identified signals) will be further examined in additional analyses (including survival, negative-control exposure, and E-value analyses) and visualizations.Results:The initial medication cohorts had a median of 6120 new users per cohort (interquartile range: 1469-38 839) and a median of 1 088 301 nonusers (interquartile range: 751 697-1 267 009). Medications with the largest number of new users were amoxicillin trihydrate (n = 1 000 032), cephalexin (n = 571 566), prescription acetaminophen (n = 571 563), and ciprofloxacin (n = 504,374); 19% to 29% of new users in these cohorts had an eGFR <60 mL/min per 1.73 m<sup>2</sup>.Limitations:Despite our use of robust techniques to balance baseline indicators and to control for confounding by indication, residual confounding will remain a possibility. Only acute (30-day) outcomes will be examined. Our data sources do not include nonprescription (over-the-counter) drugs or drugs prescribed in hospitals and do not include outpatient prescription drug use in children or adults <65 years.Conclusion:This accelerated approach to conducting postmarket drug-safety studies has the potential to more efficiently detect drug-safety signals in a vulnerable population. The results of this protocol may ultimately help improve medication safety.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».