Abstract
Aims: The purpose of this study was to describe how washout period duration affects the size and accuracy of retrospective incident user cohorts. Materials & methods: MarketScan commercial claims data from 2007 to 2010 were used and included adults with an antihyperlipidemic, antidiabetic or antidepressant claim in 2010. Incident user cohorts using 3-, 6-, 12-, 24- and 36-month washouts were created and changes in sample size and incident user misclassification were described. Results & conclusion: The 6- and 12-month washouts excluded 75 and 85% of the samples, respectively. Half of subjects in the 6-month washout cohorts were actually prevalent users, and the 12-month washout period resulted in 30% misclassified. Using common washout periods of 6-12 months may insufficiently address prevalent user bias in large commercial claims databases.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 27-35 |
Number of pages | 9 |
Journal | Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research |
Volume | 4 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Jan 1 2015 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2015 Future Medicine Ltd.
Keywords
- comparative effectiveness research
- incident user design
- methods
- pharmacoepidemiology
- research design
- secondary databases
- selection bias