Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jul;90(7):1688-1698.
doi: 10.1111/bcp.16067. Epub 2024 Apr 11.

Validating use of diagnostic codes in Canadian administrative data for identification of adverse drug events

Maeve E Wickham  1   2 , Kimberlyn M McGrail  2 , Michael R Law  2 , Amber Cragg  1 , Corinne M Hohl  1   3
Affiliations
Free article

Validating use of diagnostic codes in Canadian administrative data for identification of adverse drug events

Maeve E Wickham et al. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2024 Jul.
Free article

Abstract

Aims: While diagnostic codes from administrative health data might be a valuable source to identify adverse drug events (ADEs), their ability to identify unintended harms remains unclear. We validated claims-based diagnosis codes for ADEs based on events identified in a prospective cohort study and assessed whether key attributes predicted their documentation in administrative data.

Methods: This was a retrospective analysis of 3 prospective cohorts in British Columbia, from 2008 to 2015 (n = 13 969). We linked prospectively identified ADEs to administrative insurance data to examine the sensitivity and specificity of different diagnostic code schemes. We used logistic regression to assess which key attributes (e.g., type of event, symptoms and culprit medications) were associated with better documentation of ADEs in administrative data.

Results: Among 1178 diagnosed events, the sensitivity of the diagnostic codes in administrative data ranged from 3.4 to 52.6%, depending on the database and codes used. We found that documentation was worse for certain types of ADEs (dose-related: odds ratio [OR]: 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.15, 0.69; nonadherence events (OR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.62), and better for those experiencing arrhythmias (OR: 4.19, 95% CI: 0.96, 18.28).

Conclusion: ADEs were not well documented in administrative data. Alternative methods should be explored to capture ADEs for health research.

Keywords: administrative data; adverse drug event; adverse drug reaction; drug safety; pharmacovigilance.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Hohl CM, Badke K, Zhao A, et al. Prospective validation of clinical criteria to identify emergency department patients at high risk for adverse drug events. Acad Emerg Med. 2018;25(9):1015‐1026. doi:10.1111/acem.13407
    1. Zed PJ, Abu‐Laban RB, Balen RM, et al. Incidence, severity and preventability of medication‐related visits to the emergency dep0061rtment: a prospective study. CMAJ. 2008;178(12):1563‐1569. doi:10.1503/cmaj.071594
    1. Sorensen SV, Dewilde S, Singer DE, Goldhaber SZ, Monz BU, Plumb JM. Cost‐effectiveness of warfarin: Trial versus “real‐world” stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation. Am Heart J. 2009;157(6):1064‐1073. doi:10.1016/j.ahj.2009.03.022
    1. Staa T‐P, Leufkens HG, Zhang B, Smeeth L. A comparison of cost effectiveness using data from randomized trials or actual clinical practice: selective Cox‐2 inhibitors as an example. PLoS Med. 2009;6(12):e1000194. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000194
    1. Unger JM, Cook E, Tai E, Bleyer A. The role of clinical trial participation in cancer research: barriers, evidence, and strategies. American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book American Society of Clinical Oncology Annual Meeting. 2016;35(36):185‐198. doi:10.1200/EDBK_156686

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources