MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160456894

Frequency and predictors of tablet splitting in statin prescriptions: a population-based analysis.

2008· article· en· W2160456894 on OpenAlex
Colin R. Dormuth, Sebastian Schneeweiß, Alan Brookhart, Greg Carney, Ken Bassett, Stephen Adams, James M Wright

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical studies and practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRosuvastatinMedical prescriptionStatinConfidence intervalOdds ratioFluvastatinAtorvastatinPrescription drugPopulationInternal medicineEnvironmental healthPharmacologySimvastatin
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The price per milligram for most statin medications decreases at higher strengths, which provides an economic incentive to split tablets. We sought to determine the frequency with which statin tablets are split, and to evaluate factors associated with this practice. METHODS: We obtained prescription claims data for statins from the BC Ministry of Health for the period Jan. 1, 1996, to Dec. 31, 2006. We estimated the number of tablets per day, based on the ratio of the number of tablets to days-supply in each prescription, to estimate the frequency with which splitting occurred with each statin. We used multivariable logistic regression to assess patient and physician characteristics and the level of public drug plan coverage associated with tablet splitting. To estimate related cost savings, we used information on drug costs and quantities of dispensed statins reported by pharmacies. RESULTS: During the 11-year study period, we estimated that tablet splitting occurred in 2.6% of 7.2 million statin prescriptions. There was an increasing trend in the practice over time, to 4.5% of prescriptions in 2006. Lovastatin was the only scored tablet and was the most likely to be split, followed by rosuvastatin and atorvastatin. Fifty percent of the prescriptions in which tablet splitting occurred were prescribed by only 7.9% of the routine statin prescribers (i.e., > 10 statin prescriptions over the study period). Specialists were less likely than general practitioners to prescribe statins that were subsequently split (odds ratio [OR] 0.43, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-0.46). Statin prescriptions that were fully covered by the public drug plan were half as likely as those with no such coverage to involve tablet splitting (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.44-0.92). Having no public drug coverage, having a low annual household income and being female were patient factors found to be positively associated with tablet splitting. In 2006, the cost savings associated with tablet splitting was $2.3 million. INTERPRETATION: The frequency of tablet splitting in statin prescriptions in British Columbia was low but increased over time. It varied between patients, physicians and different levels of insurance coverage. In the final study year, 94.5% of the statin prescriptions were dispensed at strengths for which a tablet of twice the strength was available and could have been split, which suggests a potentially enormous cost savings.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.064
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.245 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it