Scholarlink

Purpose <p>We compared adherence measurements across electronic health records (EHRs) and claims data for 79 HR + breast cancer survivors, considering their race, ethnicity, language, and insurance status.</p> Methods <p>Adherence was evaluated using the medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered (PDC). The correlation between EHR and claims data was assessed with Spearman correlation coefficients, while Kaplan–Meier curves were employed to visualize and analyze the time to the first instance of non-adherence and the time to discontinuation.</p> Results <p>A total of 75 breast cancer patients receiving care at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) were identified. While there was a positive correlation, EHR data tended to overestimate adherence based on medication prescriptions, while claims data captured adherence through prescription fills. Kaplan–Meier analyses demonstrated differences in the time to first non-adherence between EHR and claims data sources, with observed variations based on language and insurance status.</p> Conclusion <p>Our findings suggest that EHR and claims data offer complementary insights into adherence measurement, and their integration could improve adherence assessment across diverse populations.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Comparing endocrine therapy adherence across EHR and claims data by race and ethnicity, language, and insurance

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月3日

查看全文
  • Michelle O. Sodipo,
  • Alicia K. Morgans,
  • Lorelei A. Mucci,
  • Audra Hite Morris,
  • Beza Tadess,
  • Sebastien Haneuse,
  • Erica T. Warner

摘要

Purpose

We compared adherence measurements across electronic health records (EHRs) and claims data for 79 HR + breast cancer survivors, considering their race, ethnicity, language, and insurance status.

Methods

Adherence was evaluated using the medication possession ratio (MPR) and proportion of days covered (PDC). The correlation between EHR and claims data was assessed with Spearman correlation coefficients, while Kaplan–Meier curves were employed to visualize and analyze the time to the first instance of non-adherence and the time to discontinuation.

Results

A total of 75 breast cancer patients receiving care at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) were identified. While there was a positive correlation, EHR data tended to overestimate adherence based on medication prescriptions, while claims data captured adherence through prescription fills. Kaplan–Meier analyses demonstrated differences in the time to first non-adherence between EHR and claims data sources, with observed variations based on language and insurance status.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest that EHR and claims data offer complementary insights into adherence measurement, and their integration could improve adherence assessment across diverse populations.