Journal article icon

Journal article

Validity of Using Prescription Medications to Classify Disease - A Retrospective Observational Study Using Routinely Collected Electronic Health Records from the UK

Abstract:
BackgroundEpidemiological studies rely on valid classifications of patients' disease status. However, in the absence of perfect information on every patients' health status, researchers use proxy information with variable and often unknown validity.MethodsTo investigate the validity of using prescription records for disease classification, we conducted a retrospective observational study on a UK-wide database of medical prescriptions and clinical records (Optimum Patient Care Research Database). We used electronic health records of 25,000 randomly selected patients for each year between 2004 and 2020 (total N=425,000) and compared disease classification of 18 different chronic conditions based on clinical records for a period of three years (gold standard) with disease classification based on prescription records for the same period. We then used logistic regression to analyse if positive and negative predicted values (PPV and NPV) were associated with known predictors of disease.ResultsResults showed large variations in PPV ranging from 8% (heart failure) to 94% (all type diabetes) and smaller variations in NPV ranging from 96% (anxiety) to 100% (Type 1 diabetes). Age, sex, ethnicity, and year but not socio-economic status were associated with variations in validity, especially in classifying dementia, diabetes, and depression.DiscussionVarying validity can partly be explained by different (stratum-specific) prevalence of disease. Additionally, conditions like heart failure can be treated with medication that can also be prescribed for other conditions or can be treated without medication. However, varying validity can also be attributed to imperfect clinical records, which we used as gold standard. As a consequence of low validity, the apparent prevalence based on using prescription records was between 1.3 times lower (all-type diabetes) and up-to 11 times higher (heart failure) than the true prevalence based on the clinical records.ConclusionStudies using prescription data to classify disease status run a substantial risk of misclassification bias.
Publication status:
Published
Peer review status:
Peer reviewed

Actions

Access Document

Files:
Publisher copy:
10.2147/por.s553011

Authors

More by this author
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0000-0001-7238-7871
More by this author
Institution:
University of Oxford
Role:
Author
More by this author
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0000-0003-0149-4869
More by this author
Role:
Author
ORCID:
0000-0002-9728-9992


Publisher:
Taylor and Francis Group
Journal:
Pragmatic and Observational Research More from this journal
Volume:
17
Pages:
1-14
Publication date:
2026-01-15
Acceptance date:
2025-11-10
DOI:
EISSN:
1179-7266
ISSN:
1179-7266
Pmid:
41567609


Language:
English
Keywords:
Pubs id:
2366986
UUID:
uuid_f35c889e-efec-4dbe-b3c1-a09a7a32af58
Local pid:
pubs:2366986
Source identifiers:
3708164
Deposit date:
2026-01-30
ARK identifier:
This ORA record was generated from metadata provided by an external service. It has not been edited by the ORA Team.

Terms of use


Views and Downloads






If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record

TO TOP