Abstract MP76: Trends in Adherence to Statin Therapy Among US Adults With Health Insurance Between 2007 and 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Statins are effective for the primary and secondary prevention of coronary heart disease (CHD) events. However, studies from the early 2000s have suggested that many patients have low adherence to statin therapy. Objective: To analyze trends in adherence among US adults initiating treatment with a statin. Methods: We identified US adults 21-64 years of age with commercial health insurance in Marketscan and ≥65 years of age with government health insurance through Medicare who initiated statin therapy in 2007-2014. Three populations were analyzed, those initiating statin therapy 1) following myocardial infarction (n=52,828 in Marketscan, n=148,745 in Medicare), 2) with diabetes without a history of CHD (n=565,573 in Marketscan, n=42,411 in Medicare), and 3) without diabetes or a history of CHD (n=2,134,501 in Marketscan, n=105,948 in Medicare). Adherence to statin therapy was defined by having a statin available to take for ≥80% of the 365 days following treatment initiation. Results: Adherence to statin therapy increased in each population analyzed ( Figure ). In 2014, 68.1% and 62.7% of patients initiating treatment following myocardial infarction in Marketscan and Medicare, respectively were adherent to their statin. Less than half of patients initiating treatment with diabetes without CHD and without diabetes or CHD in Marketscan and Medicare were adherent to their statin. Adherence to statin therapy in the overall Marketscan and Medicare populations was higher among men (relative risk [95% CI] 1.16 [1.15, 1.18] and 1.10 [1.08, 1.12], respectively), and those with cardiologist visits (1.22 [1.21, 1.24] and 1.27 [1.25, 1.30], respectively), and lower among those with kidney disease diagnosed after treatment initiation (0.89 [0.85, 0.94] and 0.92 [0.88, 0.96], respectively). Conclusion: Adherence to statins improved slightly between 2007 and 2014 but remains suboptimal. Management by a cardiologist is associated with better adherence to statins.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".