药物流行病学的核心概念:多数据库分布式数据网络。

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Rachelle Haber, Michael Webster-Clark, Nicole Pratt, Nicola Barclay, Xue Li, Judith C Maro, Robert W Platt, Daniel Prieto-Alhambra, Kristian B Filion
{"title":"药物流行病学的核心概念:多数据库分布式数据网络。","authors":"Rachelle Haber, Michael Webster-Clark, Nicole Pratt, Nicola Barclay, Xue Li, Judith C Maro, Robert W Platt, Daniel Prieto-Alhambra, Kristian B Filion","doi":"10.1002/pds.70177","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Multi-database distributed data networks for post-marketing surveillance of drug safety and effectiveness use two main approaches: common data models (CDMs) and common protocols. Networks such as the U.S. Sentinel System, the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) network, and the Data Analysis and Real-World Interrogation Network in Europe (DARWIN-EU) use a CDM approach in which participating databases are translated into a standardized structure so that a single, common analytic program can be used. On the other hand, the common protocol approach involves applying a single common protocol to site-specific data maintained in their native format, with analytic programs tailored to each data source. Some networks, such as the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies (CNODES) and the Asian Pharmacoepidemiology Network (AsPEN), use a variety of approaches for multi-database studies. Regardless of the approach, distributed networks support comprehensive pharmacoepidemiologic studies by leveraging large-scale health data. For example, utilization studies can uncover prescribing trends in different jurisdictions and the impact of policy changes on drug use, while safety and effectiveness studies benefit from large, diverse patient populations, leading to increased precision, representativeness, and potential early detection of safety threats. Challenges include varying coding practices and data heterogeneity, which complicate the standardization of evidence and the comparability and generalizability of findings. In this Core Concepts paper, we review the purpose and different types of distributed data networks in pharmacoepidemiology, discuss their advantages and disadvantages, and describe commonly faced challenges and opportunities in conducting research using multi-database networks.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"34 7","pages":"e70177"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12230205/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Core Concepts in Pharmacoepidemiology: Multi-Database Distributed Data Networks.\",\"authors\":\"Rachelle Haber, Michael Webster-Clark, Nicole Pratt, Nicola Barclay, Xue Li, Judith C Maro, Robert W Platt, Daniel Prieto-Alhambra, Kristian B Filion\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/pds.70177\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Multi-database distributed data networks for post-marketing surveillance of drug safety and effectiveness use two main approaches: common data models (CDMs) and common protocols. Networks such as the U.S. Sentinel System, the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) network, and the Data Analysis and Real-World Interrogation Network in Europe (DARWIN-EU) use a CDM approach in which participating databases are translated into a standardized structure so that a single, common analytic program can be used. On the other hand, the common protocol approach involves applying a single common protocol to site-specific data maintained in their native format, with analytic programs tailored to each data source. Some networks, such as the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies (CNODES) and the Asian Pharmacoepidemiology Network (AsPEN), use a variety of approaches for multi-database studies. Regardless of the approach, distributed networks support comprehensive pharmacoepidemiologic studies by leveraging large-scale health data. For example, utilization studies can uncover prescribing trends in different jurisdictions and the impact of policy changes on drug use, while safety and effectiveness studies benefit from large, diverse patient populations, leading to increased precision, representativeness, and potential early detection of safety threats. Challenges include varying coding practices and data heterogeneity, which complicate the standardization of evidence and the comparability and generalizability of findings. In this Core Concepts paper, we review the purpose and different types of distributed data networks in pharmacoepidemiology, discuss their advantages and disadvantages, and describe commonly faced challenges and opportunities in conducting research using multi-database networks.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19782,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"volume\":\"34 7\",\"pages\":\"e70177\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12230205/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70177\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70177","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

用于药品上市后安全性和有效性监测的多数据库分布式数据网络使用两种主要方法:通用数据模型(cdm)和通用协议。网络,如美国哨兵系统,观察健康数据科学和信息学(OHDSI)网络,以及欧洲的数据分析和现实世界询问网络(DARWIN-EU)使用CDM方法,其中参与的数据库被转换成标准化结构,以便可以使用一个单一的,通用的分析程序。另一方面,公共协议方法涉及将单一公共协议应用于以其原生格式维护的特定于站点的数据,并使用针对每个数据源的分析程序。一些网络,如加拿大观察性药物效应研究网络(CNODES)和亚洲药物流行病学网络(AsPEN),使用多种方法进行多数据库研究。无论采用何种方法,分布式网络通过利用大规模健康数据支持全面的药物流行病学研究。例如,利用研究可以揭示不同司法管辖区的处方趋势以及政策变化对药物使用的影响,而安全性和有效性研究受益于大量不同的患者群体,从而提高了准确性、代表性和潜在的早期发现安全威胁。挑战包括不同的编码实践和数据异质性,这使证据的标准化和发现的可比性和概括性复杂化。在这篇核心概念论文中,我们回顾了分布式数据网络在药物流行病学中的目的和不同类型,讨论了它们的优点和缺点,并描述了使用多数据库网络进行研究通常面临的挑战和机遇。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Core Concepts in Pharmacoepidemiology: Multi-Database Distributed Data Networks.

Multi-database distributed data networks for post-marketing surveillance of drug safety and effectiveness use two main approaches: common data models (CDMs) and common protocols. Networks such as the U.S. Sentinel System, the Observational Health Data Sciences and Informatics (OHDSI) network, and the Data Analysis and Real-World Interrogation Network in Europe (DARWIN-EU) use a CDM approach in which participating databases are translated into a standardized structure so that a single, common analytic program can be used. On the other hand, the common protocol approach involves applying a single common protocol to site-specific data maintained in their native format, with analytic programs tailored to each data source. Some networks, such as the Canadian Network for Observational Drug Effect Studies (CNODES) and the Asian Pharmacoepidemiology Network (AsPEN), use a variety of approaches for multi-database studies. Regardless of the approach, distributed networks support comprehensive pharmacoepidemiologic studies by leveraging large-scale health data. For example, utilization studies can uncover prescribing trends in different jurisdictions and the impact of policy changes on drug use, while safety and effectiveness studies benefit from large, diverse patient populations, leading to increased precision, representativeness, and potential early detection of safety threats. Challenges include varying coding practices and data heterogeneity, which complicate the standardization of evidence and the comparability and generalizability of findings. In this Core Concepts paper, we review the purpose and different types of distributed data networks in pharmacoepidemiology, discuss their advantages and disadvantages, and describe commonly faced challenges and opportunities in conducting research using multi-database networks.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
173
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report. Particular areas of interest include: design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology; comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world; methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology; assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy; patterns of drug utilization; relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines; evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信