MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3031441577 · doi:10.1177/2045894020933083

Variation in the use of pulmonary vasodilators in children and adolescents with pulmonary hypertension: a study using data from the MarketScan® insurance claims database

2020· article· en· W3031441577 on OpenAlex
Michael L. O’Byrne, Jennifer Faerber, Hannah Katcoff, David B. Frank, Alex Davidson, Therese M. Giglia, Catherine M. Avitabile

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

VenuePulmonary Circulation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
KeywordsMedicinePulmonary hypertensionRegimenInternal medicineTreprostinilDrug classEndothelin receptor antagonistCardiologyPharmacologyEndothelin receptorDrugReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite progress in pharmacotherapy in pediatric pulmonary hypertension, real‐world patterns of directed pulmonary hypertension therapy have not been studied in the current era. A retrospective observational study of children (≤18 years) with pulmonary hypertension was performed using data from the MarketScan® Commercial and Medicaid claims databases. Associations between etiology of pulmonary hypertension and pharmaceutical regimen were evaluated, as were the associations between subject social and geographic characteristics (insurance‐type, race, and/or census region) and regimen. Annualized costs of single‐ and multi‐class regimens were calculated. In total, 873 subjects were studied, of which 94% received phosphodiesterase‐5 inhibitors, 31% endothelin receptor antagonist, 9% prostacyclin analogs, and 7% calcium channel blockers. Monotherapy was used in 72% of subjects. Phosphodiesterase‐5 inhibitors monotherapy was the most common regimen (93%). Subjects with idiopathic pulmonary hypertension, congenital heart disease, and unclassified pulmonary hypertension receive more than one agent and were more likely to receive both endothelin receptor antagonist and prostacyclin analogs than other forms of pulmonary hypertension. Compared to recipients of public insurance, subjects with commercial insurance were more likely to receive more intense therapy ( p = 0.003), which was confirmed in multivariable analysis (OR: 1.4, p = 0.03). Receipt of commercial insurance was also associated with increased annual costs across all subjects ( p < 0.001) and for the most common specific regimens. The majority of children with pulmonary hypertension receive phosphodiesterase monotherapy, followed by phosphodiesterase–endothelin receptor antagonist two drug regimens, and finally the addition of prostacyclin analogs for three‐drug therapy. However, even after adjustment for measurable confounders, commercial insurance was associated with higher intensity care and higher costs (even within specific classes of pulmonary vasodilators). The effect of these associations on clinical outcome cannot be discerned from the current data set, but patterns of treatment deserve further attention.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.742

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.183 · 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