MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407831131 · doi:10.1002/pds.70115

Development of a Pregnancy Cohort in Commercial Insurance Claims Data: Evaluation of Deliveries Identified From Inpatient Versus Outpatient Claims

2025· article· en· W4407831131 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jacob C. Kahrs, Katelin B. Nickel, Mollie E. Wood, Sascha Dublin, Michael J. Durkin, Sarah S. Osmundson, Dustin Stwalley, Elizabeth A. Suarez, Anne M. Butler

Bibliographic record

VenuePharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy and Medication Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentAbbVie CanadaUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel HillNational Institutes of HealthAstellas PharmaSarepta TherapeuticsInstitute of Clinical and Translational Sciences
KeywordsMedicineDiagnosis codeInpatient carePregnancyCohortEmergency medicineFamily medicineObstetricsHealth carePopulationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Studies using insurance claims data to identify pregnancies are rarely able to directly assess the validity of the pregnancy/delivery. Inpatient versus outpatient delivery claims may provide different levels of evidence, but more stringent requirements could result in exclusion of true pregnancies. We identified delivery codes from the inpatient and outpatient settings and examined possible confirmatory evidence suggesting that a delivery truly occurred. METHODS: Using a US commercial insurance database (2006-2021), we identified potential pregnancies by presence of delivery claims from a provider and/or facility. We classified deliveries as inpatient (claim date during inpatient admission) or outpatient (claim date not during inpatient admission). We identified possible confirmatory evidence for each delivery including: (1) Presence of both provider and facility delivery codes; (2) presence of both diagnosis and procedure delivery codes; (3) labor and delivery revenue codes; (4) gestational age diagnosis codes; (5) pregnancy-related care codes; (6) linkage to an infant claim; and (7) infant insurance enrollment and linkage to a birthing parent. We quantified the proportion of deliveries with confirmatory evidence by delivery setting. Among deliveries with ≥ 1 piece of confirmatory evidence, we compared patient characteristics by apparent delivery setting. RESULTS: Among 4 084 474 delivery episodes, 96.4% were classified as inpatient and 3.6% outpatient. 99.9% of inpatient and 94.0% of outpatient deliveries had ≥ 1 piece of confirmatory evidence. Pregnancy-related care codes were the most common type of confirmatory evidence (99.0% inpatient, 85.7% outpatient). Deliveries classified as inpatient occurred among patients who were older and more clinically complex (i.e., more pregnancy complications, chronic diseases, and prescription medications). CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of deliveries had confirmatory evidence regardless of apparent setting. Patient characteristics differed by delivery setting. Inclusion of apparent outpatient deliveries may increase the sample size of the study population and improve the generalizability of study results.

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)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.097
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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.223

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.097
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0070.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePharmacoepidemiology and Drug SafetySame topicPregnancy and Medication ImpactFrench-language works237,207