MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2402754141

Does concordance between survey responses and administrative records differ by ethnicity for prescription medication?

2012· article· en· W2402754141 on OpenAlexaffabout
Lawrence So, Stephen G Morgan, Hude Quan

Bibliographic record

VenuePubMed · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMedication Adherence and Compliance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcordanceEthnic groupMedical prescriptionMedicineDemographyLogistic regressionOdds ratioOddsRespondentInternal medicine
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Self-reported prescription medication use data is often used to measure differences across ethnic groups, but its accuracy may differ across ethnic groups. OBJECTIVE: We compared ethnic groups' self-reported medication use to their administrative records for respondents with diabetes, hypertension, and asthma. METHODS: We linked the Canadian Community Health Survey to administrative prescription drug records for 17,191 respondents in British Columbia, Canada. We evaluated the concordance between self-reported medication use and prescription drug records using positive predictive value, negative predictive value, sensitivity, specificity, and kappa statistic for self-identified Whites, Chinese, South Asians, and Southeast Asians/Filipinos. The concordance was calculated using prescription drug records as the reference standard. We also estimated the odds of disagreement (either a false positive or negative) in medication use with logistic regressions for each ethnic group, and compared them using the Blinder-Oaxaca method. RESULTS: We found that Chinese had the worst positive predictive value for asthma medication use at 0.41, while South Asians had the worst sensitivity for hypertension medication use at 0.60. The difference in reporting an error between ethnic groups was likely explained by differences in respondent characteristics. Particularly, if White respondents had the same characteristics as South Asians, then White respondents would have had 1.031 (95% CI: 1.020-1.041) higher odds of disagreement for hypertension medication use than with their own characteristics. CONCLUSION: Self-reported medication use may be a valid measure of ethnic groups' medication use if ethnic differences in characteristics, like household income are held constant. However, an important determinant of validity for all ethnic groups is whether medications are used routinely, or for a specific episode.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.131
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.131
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePubMedSame topicMedication Adherence and ComplianceFrench-language works237,207