ingest
cdrApp
2017-07-06T12:56:21.815Z
f230b17a-68de-497f-ac05-5cb17af9fe4f
modifyDatastreamByValue
RELS-EXT
cdrApp
2017-07-06T13:18:31.262Z
Setting exclusive relation
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2018-01-25T07:02:31.668Z
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2018-01-27T07:36:16.602Z
modifyDatastreamByValue
RELS-EXT
fedoraAdmin
2018-02-24T16:17:13.886Z
Setting exclusive relation
addDatastream
MD_TECHNICAL
fedoraAdmin
2018-02-24T16:17:25.188Z
Adding technical metadata derived by FITS
addDatastream
MD_FULL_TEXT
fedoraAdmin
2018-02-24T16:17:53.285Z
Adding full text metadata extracted by Apache Tika
modifyDatastreamByValue
RELS-EXT
fedoraAdmin
2018-02-24T16:18:16.166Z
Setting exclusive relation
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2018-02-28T20:57:20.570Z
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2018-03-14T04:00:35.317Z
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2018-05-17T15:40:18.906Z
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2018-07-11T02:23:25.370Z
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2018-07-17T22:45:10.321Z
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2018-08-15T18:54:08.229Z
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2018-09-21T19:15:51.357Z
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2018-09-26T22:32:52.988Z
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2018-10-11T23:07:17.747Z
modifyDatastreamByValue
MD_DESCRIPTIVE
cdrApp
2019-03-20T16:48:18.858Z
Robert
Overman
Author
Pharmaceutical Sciences Program
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study.
For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid.
Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated.
Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons.
Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
Spring 2017
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims, FRAX, Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
Degree granting institution
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
Robert
Overman
Creator
Pharmaceutical Sciences Program
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative
claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which
has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system.
Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most
prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically
to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body
mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this
dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if
administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate
how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to
determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this
project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a
multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals
receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4
different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF)
with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index
(CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous
FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the
estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the
linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to
evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in
CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX®
to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce
confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users
versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression
component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding,
residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture
Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears
to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared
to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also
appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are
available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for
both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic
fracture.
Spring 2017
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims, FRAX, Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
Degree granting
institution
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
Robert
Overman
Creator
Pharmaceutical Sciences Program
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
Spring 2017
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims, FRAX, Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
Degree granting institution
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
Robert
Overman
Creator
Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
Spring 2017
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims, FRAX, Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
Degree granting institution
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
Robert
Overman
Creator
Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
2017-05
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims, FRAX, Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
Degree granting institution
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
Robert
Overman
Creator
Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims, FRAX, Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
Degree granting institution
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
2017-05
Robert
Overman
Creator
Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims, FRAX, Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
Degree granting institution
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
2017-05
Robert
Overman
Creator
Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims, FRAX, Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
Degree granting institution
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
2017-05
Robert
Overman
Creator
Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims, FRAX, Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M. Alan
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
2017-05
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Degree granting institution
Robert
Overman
Creator
Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims, FRAX, Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
Degree granting institution
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
2017-05
Robert
Overman
Creator
Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims; FRAX; Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M. Alan
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
2017-05
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Degree granting institution
Robert
Overman
Creator
Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims, FRAX, Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
Degree granting institution
Pharmaceutical Sciences
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M. Alan
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
2017-05
Robert
Overman
Creator
Division of Pharmaceutical Outcomes and Policy
Eshelman School of Pharmacy
Prediction and Utility of a clinical fracture risk score in administrative claims
The clinical manifestation of osteoporosis is osteoporotic fracture, which has been estimated to cost $25.3 billion by 2025 within the US healthcare system. Osteoporotic fracture risk has been measured using various risk scores with the most prevalent being FRAX® from the World Health Organization. FRAX® scores are used clinically to guide treatment, but these scores and key inputs (such as bone mineral density and body mass index) cannot be measured in administrative claims. The objectives of this dissertation are 1) to create a claims-based fracture risk score to determine if administrative claims data can be used to predict FRAX® (interval validation); to evaluate how the risk score performs in a different population (external validity); and 3) to determine the best way to utilize the fracture risk score in a research study. For this project, we linked registry data including clinical fracture risk factors from a multispecialty academic hospital with Medicare administrative claims for individuals receiving a dual energy x-ray absorptiometry scan (DXA) between 2009 and 2013. FRAX® has 4 different scores for 10-year fracture risk of hip and major osteoporotic fracture (MOF) with and without bone mineral density. We created the Calculated Fracture Risk Index (CFRI) to estimate these 4 scores. We found that we were able to predict a continuous FRAX® score with an adjusted R2 that accounted for between 21 to 43% of variation in the estimates. We found these estimates to be internally valid. Subsequently we used the linked dataset and a 20% random selection of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries to evaluate the external validity of our CFRI scores. We found no significant differences in CFRI and FRAX® ability to predict 1 year fractures. Additionally, we found CFRI and FRAX® to be similarly calibrated. Lastly, we found that we were not able to sufficiently reduce confounding in a non-experimental comparative effectiveness study of alendronate users versus non-users to that of a randomized clinical trial using CFRI as a regression component or a restriction device. Although estimates including CFRI reduced confounding, residual confounding remained and estimates differed from those in the Fracture Intervention Trial (FIT); the gold standard in for our comparisons. Overall CFRI appears to be internally and externally valid and a useful tool in reducing confounding compared to its non-use in osteoporosis research, though not to the level of an RCT. It also appears to be a reasonable proxy score for FRAX® when only administrative claims data are available. Therefore, CFRI when calculated in administrative claims should be useful for both researchers and policy makers to determine who is at risk for osteoporotic fracture.
2017
Pharmaceutical sciences
Epidemiology
Administrative Claims; FRAX; Prediction
eng
Doctor of Philosophy
Dissertation
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Graduate School
Degree granting institution
Stacie
Dusetzina
Thesis advisor
M. Alan
Brookhart
Thesis advisor
Margaret
Gourlay
Thesis advisor
Joel
Farley
Thesis advisor
Betsy
Sleath
Thesis advisor
text
2017-05
Overman_unc_0153D_16847.pdf
uuid:b1cec433-e1b7-4f83-b0f1-70f60552683c
2019-07-06T00:00:00
2017-04-26T00:16:44Z
proquest
yes
application/pdf
6994024