• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

专家组对观察性数据中急性肝损伤识别的评估。

Expert panel assessment of acute liver injury identification in observational data.

机构信息

Department of Pharmacy Care Systems, Harrison School of Pharmacy, Auburn University, Auburn, AL.

出版信息

Res Social Adm Pharm. 2014 Jan-Feb;10(1):156-67. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2013.04.012. Epub 2013 Jun 7.

DOI:10.1016/j.sapharm.2013.04.012
PMID:23746420
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Observational data are useful for studying drug safety; however, to be effective, accurate outcome measurement is paramount.

OBJECTIVES

This study compared alternative outcome definitions for acute liver injury (ALI) and explored opportunities for improving ALI identification in observational data.

METHODS

The Truven MarketScan® Lab Database (MSLR) was used to identify patients meeting at least 1 of 4 ALI definitions, including definitions based on diagnosis codes, laboratory measures, or combinations of diagnoses, procedures, and/or laboratory measures. Expert panelists reviewed patient data using a Web dashboard. Panelists determined whether they believed the patient had ALI and identified factors influencing their decision. Logistic regression models explored which factors were influential in case determination.

RESULTS

Overall, only 37 of 208 reviewed patients (17.8%) were classified as cases. The diagnosis-based definition yielded no positive cases and the laboratory-based definition yielded the most positive cases (31 of 60). The most influential factors in case classification were occurrence of procedures after the index date (OR = 13.2, 95% CI = 5.3-32.9), no occurrence of drug treatments before the index date (OR = 4.6; 95% CI = 1.6-13.2), occurrence of drug treatments before the index date (OR = 0.3; 95% CI = 0.1-0.6), and no drug treatments after the index date (OR = 0.2; 95% CI = 0.0-0.5).

CONCLUSIONS

Comparing ALI definitions illustrated tradeoffs between the number of plausible cases identified and the likelihood of cases being classified as positive. Future research should refine ALI case definitions, considering the import of laboratory results, procedures, and drugs in defining a case.

摘要

背景

观察性数据可用于研究药物安全性;然而,为了达到有效目的,准确的结局测量至关重要。

目的

本研究比较了急性肝损伤(ALI)的替代结局定义,并探讨了在观察性数据中改善 ALI 识别的机会。

方法

使用 Truven MarketScan® Lab 数据库(MSLR)来识别至少符合 4 种 ALI 定义之一的患者,包括基于诊断代码、实验室测量或诊断、程序和/或实验室测量的组合的定义。专家小组使用 Web 仪表板审查患者数据。小组成员确定他们是否认为患者患有 ALI,并确定影响他们决策的因素。逻辑回归模型探讨了哪些因素对病例确定有影响。

结果

总体而言,只有 208 名审查患者中的 37 名(17.8%)被归类为病例。基于诊断的定义没有阳性病例,基于实验室的定义则产生了最多的阳性病例(60 例中的 31 例)。病例分类中最具影响力的因素是索引日期后发生的程序(OR=13.2,95%CI=5.3-32.9),索引日期前没有药物治疗(OR=4.6;95%CI=1.6-13.2),索引日期前有药物治疗(OR=0.3;95%CI=0.1-0.6),以及索引日期后没有药物治疗(OR=0.2;95%CI=0.0-0.5)。

结论

比较 ALI 定义说明了所识别的合理病例数量与病例被归类为阳性的可能性之间的权衡。未来的研究应考虑实验室结果、程序和药物在定义病例中的重要性,来完善 ALI 病例定义。

相似文献

1
Expert panel assessment of acute liver injury identification in observational data.专家组对观察性数据中急性肝损伤识别的评估。
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2014 Jan-Feb;10(1):156-67. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2013.04.012. Epub 2013 Jun 7.
2
Developing an expert panel process to refine health outcome definitions in observational data.开发专家小组流程以精炼观察性数据中的健康结局定义。
J Biomed Inform. 2013 Oct;46(5):795-804. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2013.05.006. Epub 2013 Jun 13.
3
How well do various health outcome definitions identify appropriate cases in observational studies?各种健康结局定义在观察性研究中能很好地识别合适的病例吗?
Drug Saf. 2013 Oct;36 Suppl 1:S27-32. doi: 10.1007/s40264-013-0104-0.
4
Assessment of case definitions for identifying acute liver injury in large observational databases.评估大型观察性数据库中用于识别急性肝损伤的病例定义。
Drug Saf. 2013 Aug;36(8):651-61. doi: 10.1007/s40264-013-0060-8.
5
Validity of diagnostic codes and laboratory measurements to identify patients with idiopathic acute liver injury in a hospital database.利用医院数据库中的诊断编码和实验室检测结果识别特发性急性肝损伤患者的有效性
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2016 Mar;25 Suppl 1:21-8. doi: 10.1002/pds.3824. Epub 2015 Jul 5.
6
Validity of ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes used to identify acute liver injury: A study in three European data sources.用于识别急性肝损伤的ICD - 9和ICD - 10编码的有效性:一项基于三个欧洲数据源的研究
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2019 Jul;28(7):965-975. doi: 10.1002/pds.4803. Epub 2019 Jun 6.
7
Validity of hospital ICD-10-GM codes to identify acute liver injury in Germany.德国医院 ICD-10-GM 编码识别急性肝损伤的有效性。
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2019 Oct;28(10):1344-1352. doi: 10.1002/pds.4855. Epub 2019 Aug 1.
8
Ascertainment of acute liver injury in two European primary care databases.在两个欧洲初级保健数据库中确定急性肝损伤。
Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2014 Oct;70(10):1227-35. doi: 10.1007/s00228-014-1721-y. Epub 2014 Jul 29.
9
The risk of acute liver injury associated with the use of antibiotics--evaluating robustness of results in the pharmacoepidemiological research on outcomes of therapeutics by a European consortium (PROTECT) project.与使用抗生素相关的急性肝损伤风险——通过欧洲联盟(PROTECT)项目评估治疗结局药物流行病学研究结果的稳健性。
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2016 Mar;25 Suppl 1:47-55. doi: 10.1002/pds.3841. Epub 2015 Aug 2.
10
An automated causality assessment algorithm to detect drug-induced liver injury in electronic medical record data.一种用于在电子病历数据中检测药物性肝损伤的自动化因果关系评估算法。
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2014 Jun;23(6):601-8. doi: 10.1002/pds.3531. Epub 2013 Oct 21.

引用本文的文献

1
Hepatoprotective effect of syringin combined with costunolide against LPS-induced acute liver injury in L-02 cells via Rac1/AKT/NF-κB signaling pathway.丁香苷联合土木香内酯通过 Rac1/AKT/NF-κB 信号通路对 LPS 诱导的 L-02 细胞急性肝损伤的保护作用。
Aging (Albany NY). 2023 Nov 1;15(21):11994-12020. doi: 10.18632/aging.205161.
2
Protective Effects of Costunolide Against D-Galactosamine and Lipopolysaccharide-Induced Acute Liver Injury in Mice.木香烯内酯对D-氨基半乳糖和脂多糖诱导的小鼠急性肝损伤的保护作用
Front Pharmacol. 2018 Dec 20;9:1469. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2018.01469. eCollection 2018.