Record linkage for pharmacoepidemiological studies in cancer patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An increasing need has developed for the post-approval surveillance of (new) anti-cancer drugs by means of pharmacoepidemiology and outcomes research in the area of oncology. OBJECTIVES: To create an overview that makes researchers aware of the available database linkages in Northern America and Europe which facilitate pharmacoepidemiology and outcomes research in cancer patients. METHODS: In addition to our own database, i.e. the Eindhoven Cancer Registry (ECR) linked to the PHARMO Record Linkage System, we considered database linkages between a population-based cancer registry and an administrative healthcare database that at least contains information on drug use and offers a longitudinal perspective on healthcare utilization. Eligible database linkages were limited to those that had been used in multiple published articles in English language included in Pubmed. The HMO Cancer Research Network (CRN) in the US was excluded from this review, as an overview of the linked databases participating in the CRN is already provided elsewhere. Researchers who had worked with the data resources included in our review were contacted for additional information and verification of the data presented in the overview. RESULTS: The following database linkages were included: the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End-Results-Medicare; cancer registry data linked to Medicaid; Canadian cancer registries linked to population-based drug databases; the Scottish cancer registry linked to the Tayside drug dispensing data; linked databases in the Nordic Countries of Europe: Norway, Sweden, Finland and Denmark; and the ECR-PHARMO linkage in the Netherlands. Descriptives of the included database linkages comprise population size, generalizability of the population, year of first data availability, contents of the cancer registry, contents of the administrative healthcare database, the possibility to select a cancer-free control cohort, and linkage to other healthcare databases. CONCLUSIONS: The linked databases offer a longitudinal perspective, allowing for observations of health care utilization before, during, and after cancer diagnosis. They create new powerful data resources for the monitoring of post-approval drug utilization, as well as a framework to explore the (cost-)effectiveness of new, often expensive, anti-cancer drugs as used in everyday practice.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.230 | 0.506 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.042 | 0.061 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".