Use of the CPRD Aurum Database: Insights Gained from New Data Quality Assessments

Abstract

Ongoing evaluation of any electronic health data source is critical to assess suitability for its use in medical research. In addition, familiarity with a data source’s history and recording practices is important for making informed data source selection, study design choices, and interpretation of results. In this commentary, the authors discuss three studies that assessed different aspects of the quality and completeness of information contained in Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum compared to the well-established CPRD GOLD and to other linked data sources, with the aim to describe insights gained through these data quality assessments. Our findings support the view that CPRD Aurum and GOLD are both valuable tools for studies based on information recorded in primary care but should not be used without critical consideration of strengths and limitations. Further, use of linked data should be considered for some studies, after taking into account all relevant factors.

Keywords:

• clinical practice research datalink
• CPRD Aurum
• CPRD GOLD
• validation
• data quality

Disclosure

Kafatos and Neasham are employees of Amgen Ltd, which uses CPRD data, and own shares of Amgen Inc. Jick, Vasilakis-Scaramozza, Persson, and Hagberg are employees of Boston Collaborative Drug Surveillance program which receives industry funding to conduct research using CPRD data. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work.

Additional information

Funding

This study was funded by Amgen, Inc.