Classification of drug use patterns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Characterizing long-term prescription data is challenging due to the time-varying nature of drug use. Conventional approaches summarize time-varying data into categorical variables based on simple measures, such as cumulative dose, while ignoring patterns of use. The loss of information can lead to misclassification and biased estimates of the exposure-outcome association. We introduce a classification method to characterize longitudinal prescription data with an unsupervised machine learning algorithm. We used administrative databases covering virtually all 1.3 million residents of Manitoba and explicitly designed features to describe the average dose, proportion of days covered (PDC), dose change, and dose variability, and clustered the resulting feature space using K-means clustering. We applied this method to metformin use in diabetes patients. We identified 27,786 metformin users and showed that the feature distributions of their metformin use are stable for varying the lengths of follow-up and that these distributions have clear interpretations. We found six distinct metformin user groups: patients with intermittent use, decreasing dose, increasing dose, high dose, and two medium dose groups (one with stable dose and one with highly variable use). Patients in the varying and decreasing dose groups had a higher chance of progression of diabetes than other patients. The method presented in this paper allows for characterization of drug use into distinct and clinically relevant groups in a way that cannot be obtained from merely classifying use by quantiles of overall use.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".