View Item 

Show simple item record

A Checklist for Medication Compliance and Persistence Studies Using Retrospective Databases

dc.contributor.authorPeterson, Andrew M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorNau, David P.en_US
dc.contributor.authorCramer, Joyce A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBenner, Joshen_US
dc.contributor.authorGwadry-Sridhar, Femidaen_US
dc.contributor.authorNichol, Michaelen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-06-01T22:34:57Z
dc.date.available2010-06-01T22:34:57Z
dc.date.issued2007-01en_US
dc.identifier.citationPeterson, Andrew M.; Nau, David P.; Cramer, Joyce A.; Benner, Josh; Gwadry-Sridhar, Femida; Nichol, Michael (2007). "A Checklist for Medication Compliance and Persistence Studies Using Retrospective Databases." Value in Health 10(1): 3-12. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/75562>en_US
dc.identifier.issn1098-3015en_US
dc.identifier.issn1524-4733en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/75562
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?cmd=retrieve&db=pubmed&list_uids=17261111&dopt=citationen_US
dc.description.abstractThe increasing number of retrospective database studies related to medication compliance and persistence (C&P), and the inherent variability within each, has created a need for improvement in the quality and consistency of medication C&P research. This article stems from the International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) efforts to develop a checklist of items that should be either included, or at least considered, when a retrospective database analysis of medication compliance or persistence is undertaken. This consensus document outlines a systematic approach to designing or reviewing retrospective database studies of medication C&P. Included in this article are discussions on data sources, measures of C&P, results reporting, and even conflict of interests. If followed, this checklist should improve the consistency and quality of C&P analyses, which in turn will help providers and payers understand the impact of C&P on health outcomes.en_US
dc.format.extent84741 bytes
dc.format.extent3109 bytes
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Incen_US
dc.rights2007, International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR)en_US
dc.subject.otherComplianceen_US
dc.subject.otherGuidelinesen_US
dc.subject.otherPersistenceen_US
dc.subject.otherRetrospective Databasesen_US
dc.titleA Checklist for Medication Compliance and Persistence Studies Using Retrospective Databasesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelMedicine (General)en_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA;en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of the Sciences in Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA;en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherYale University, West Haven, CT, USA;en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherValueMedics Research, LLC, Falls Church, VA, USA;en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherMcMaster University, London, ON, Canada;en_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherUniversity of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USAen_US
dc.identifier.pmid17261111en_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/75562/1/j.1524-4733.2006.00139.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1524-4733.2006.00139.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceValue in Healthen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMotheral B, Brooks J, Clark MA, et al. A checklist for retrospective database studies—report of the ISPOR task force on retrospective databases. Value Health 2003; 6: 90 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAltman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134: 663 – 94.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePitkin RM, Branagan MA, Burmeister LF. Accuracy of data in abstracts of published research articles. JAMA 1999; 281: 1110 – 11.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSteiner JF, Koepsell TD, Fihn SD, Inui TS. A general method of compliance assessment using centralized pharmacy records. Description and validation. Med Care 1998; 26: 814 – 23.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFarmer KC. Methods for measuring and monitoring medication regimen adherence in clinical trials and clinical practice. Clin Ther 1999; 21: 1074 – 90.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSteiner JF, Prochazka AV. The assessment of refill compliance using pharmacy records: methods, validity, and applications. J Clin Epidemiol 1997; 50: 105 – 16.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMorningstar BA, Sketris IS, Kephart GC, Sclar DA. Variation in pharmacy prescription refill adherence measures by type of oral antihyperglycaemic drug therapy in seniors in Nova Scotia, Canada. J Clin Pharm Ther 2002; 27: 213 – 20.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDezii CM. Persistence with drug therapy: a practical approach using administrative claims data. Manag Care 2001; 10: 42 – 5.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBenner JS, Glynn RJ, Mogun H, et al. Long-term persistence in use of statin therapy in elderly patients. JAMA 2002; 288: 455 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBenner JS, Pollack MF, Smith TW, et al. Association between short-term effectiveness of statins and long-term adherence to lipid-lowering therapy. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2005; 62: 1468 – 75.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChapman RH, Benner JS, Petrilla AA, et al. Predictors of adherence with antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapy. Arch Intern Med 2005; 165: 1147 – 52.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBenner JS, Tierce JC, Ballantyne CM, et al. Follow-up lipid tests and physician visits are associated with improved adherence to statin therapy. Pharmacoeconomics 2004; 22 ( Suppl. 3 ): 13 – 23.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMauskopf JA, Paramore C, Lee WC, Snyder EH. Drug persistency patterns for patients treated with rivastigmine or donepezil in usual care settings. J Manag Care Pharm 2005; 11: 231 – 51.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCramer JA, Sernyak M. Treatment options: switching atypical antipsychotic drugs or augmentation with divalproex, a naturalistic study. Clin Ther 2004; 26: 905 – 14.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCramer JA, Pugh MJ. The influence of insulin usage on glycemic control: how well do adults follow prescriptions for insulin? Diabetes Care 2005; 28: 78 – 83.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePaterson DL, Swindells S, Mohr J, et al. Adherence to protease inhibitor therapy and outcomes in patients with HIV infection. Ann Intern Med 2000; 133: 21 – 30.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLevine M, Ensom MH. Post hoc power analysis: an idea whose time has passed? Pharmacotherapy 2001; 21: 405 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRubin DB. Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scores. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127 ( 8 Pt 2 ): 757 – 63.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCharlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, McKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chron Dis 1987; 40: 373 – 83.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcGregor JC, Kim PW, Perencevich EN, et al. Utility of the Chronic Disease Score and Charlson Comorbidity Index as comorbidity measures for use in epidemiologic studies of antibiotic-resistant organisms. Am J Epidemiology 2005; 161: 483 – 93.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSkelton JR, Edwards SJ. The function of the discussion section in academic medical writing. BMJ 2000; 320: 1269 – 70.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDocherty M, Smith R. The case for structuring the discussion of scientific papers. BMJ 1999; 318: 1224 – 5.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlpert JS, Furman S, Smaha L. Conflicts of interest: science, money, health. Arch Intern Med 2002; 162: 635 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHasegawa GR. Full disclosure. Am J Health-Sys Pharm 2002; 59: 1835.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
j.1524-4733.2006.00139.x.pdf
Size:
82.75KB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.