https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0935-5193
![Sample our Bioscience journals, sign in here to start your access, Latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5925/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Bioscience.jpg"})
Abstract
Purpose
When using incomplete or non-representative real-world data (RWD), bias is more likely to occur. The aim of the current study was to assess the completeness and representativeness of the PHARMO GP data for the Dutch population.
Patients and Methods
A cross-sectional study was performed. The PHARMO GP data comprise data from electronic health records registered by GPs. Data on the Dutch population were obtained from Statistics Netherlands (CBS), which offers publicly available data on several themes. The standardized difference (std.diff) was used to compare proportions between the PHARMO GP population and the Dutch population. An absolute std.diff >0.2 was considered a difference.
Results
On January 1st, 2018, 3,466,321 persons were included in the PHARMO GP data (mean age: 41.6 years, 49.7% males). The sex and age distribution was similar to the Dutch population. The PHARMO GP data captured less not urbanized areas compared to the Dutch population (not urbanized areas: 9.4% vs 17.1% [std.diff: −0.23]). Regarding medication use, only the pharmacological subgroups “viral vaccines” and “hormonal contraceptives for systemic use” differed (std.diff >0.2); use in the GP data was more complete than in the Statistics Netherlands (CBS) data. No differences were observed regarding diagnoses.
Conclusion
The PHARMO GP data are representative of the Dutch population with regard to the demographic characteristics and diagnoses in primary care. Medication data in the PHARMO GP data are more complete than national statistics, and differences are related to reimbursement. Use of the data and interpretation of results based on these sources should be done with experts on the data sources, the Dutch healthcare system and (pharmaco)epidemiology.
Data Sharing Statement
Requests for sharing study data must be made on specific grounds either with the aim to corroborate the study results in the interest of Public Health or in the context of an audit by a competent authority. Sufficient information needs to be provided to confirm that the request is made for one of the above-mentioned purposes, including a wound justification and, in case of a request with a view to corroborate study results, a protocol on the research for which the data will be used or a plan for quality control checks, as applicable.
Ethics Approval and Informed Consent
The institutional review board of STIZON, Utrecht, Netherlands approved the study (Document no.: CC2021-34, date: November 25th, 2021).
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank all the healthcare providers contributing information to the PHARMO Data Network.
Author Contributions
All authors made a significant contribution to the work reported, whether that is in the conception, study design, execution, acquisition of data, analysis and interpretation, or in all these areas; took part in drafting, revising or critically reviewing the article; gave final approval of the version to be published; have agreed on the journal to which the article has been submitted; and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.
Disclosure
All authors are employees of the PHARMO Institute for Drug Outcomes Research. This independent research institute performs financially supported studies for government and related healthcare authorities and several pharmaceutical companies. JO and KS are also affiliated with Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of General Practice. EH is also affiliated with Erasmus MC, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology. RH is also affiliated with Amsterdam UMC, location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Department of Epidemiology and Data Science. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.