4.2 Article

Characteristics and external validity of the German Health Risk Institute (HRI) Database

期刊

PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY
卷 25, 期 1, 页码 106-109

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/pds.3895

关键词

data sources; healthcare databases; Germany; secondary data; external validity; pharmacoepidemiology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose The aim of this study was to describe characteristics and external validity of the German Health Risk Institute (HRI) Database. Methods The HRI Database is an anonymized healthcare database with longitudinal data from approximately six Mio Germans. In addition to demographic information (gender, age, region of residence), data on persistence of insurants over time, hospitalization rates, mortality rates and drug prescription rates were extracted from the HRI database for 2013. Corresponding national reference data were obtained from official sources. Results The proportion of men and women was similar in the HRI Database and Germany, but the database population was slightly younger (mean 40.4 vs 43.7 years). The proportion of insurants living in the eastern part of Germany was lower in the HRI Database (10.1% vs 19.7%). There was good accordance to German reference data with respect to hospitalization rates, overall mortality rate and prescription rates for the 20 most often reimbursed drug classes, with the overall burden of morbidity being slightly lower in the HRI database. From insurants insured on 1 January 2009 (N=6.2 Mio), a total of 70.6% survived and remained continuously insured with the same statutory health insurance until 31 December 2013. This proportion increased to 77.5% if only insurants >= 40 years were considered. Conclusions There was good overall accordance of the HRI database and the German population in terms of measures of morbidity, mortality and drug usage. Persistence of insurants with the database over time was high, indicating suitability of the data source for longitudinal epidemiological analyses. Copyright (C) 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据