Cited by 9Opioid Use Disorder TreatmentPain Management and Opioid UseHealthcare Policy and Management

Natural Language Processing-Identified Problem Opioid Use and Its Associated Health Care Costs

Masters, Elizabeth T., Ramaprasan, Arvind, Mardekian, Jack, Palmer, Roy E., Gross, David E., Cronkite, David, Von Korff, Michael, Carrell, David S.·2018·Journal of Pain & Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy

Abstract

Use of prescription opioids and problems of abuse and addiction have increased over the past decade. Claims-based studies have documented substantial economic burden of opioid abuse. This study utilized electronic health record (EHR) data to identify chronic opioid therapy (COT) patients with problem opioid use (POU) and compared costs with those for COT patients without POU. This study utilized EHR and claims data from an integrated health care system. Patients received COT (≥70 days' supply in ≥1 calendar quarter, 2006-2012). Natural language processing (NLP) identified notations of opioid addiction, abuse, misuse, or overuse, and manual validation was performed. Cases had evidence of POU (index = first POU notation), and controls, sampled 9:1, did not. Health care resource utilization was measured and costs estimated using Medicare reimbursement rates. A longitudinal analysis of costs was conducted using generalized estimating equations. Adjusted analyses controlled for baseline age, gender, region, specific comorbidities, and a comorbidity index. The analysis population included 1,125 cases and 10,128 controls. Unadjusted costs were higher for cases in all three years. After controlling for covariates, total costs remained higher in cases and were significantly higher in the first year of follow-up ($38,064 vs. $31,674, P = .0048). The largest cost difference was observed in the first month of follow-up. COT patients with POU experienced significantly higher costs compare…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15360288.2018.1488794

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Masters, E. T., Ramaprasan, A., Mardekian, J., Palmer, R. E., Gross, D. E., Cronkite, D., Von Korff, M., & Carrell, D. S.
Corresponding author
Masters, Elizabeth T.
Venue
Journal of Pain & Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy
Published
2018-07-03
Volume
32
Issue
2-3
Pages
106-115
ISSN
  • 1536-0288 (ISSN-L)
  • 1536-0539
OpenAlex
W2911677221
Cited by
9
References
1
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.67
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Pain & Palliative Care Pharmacotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Kaiser Permanente Washington
  • Pfizer Inc.
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Opioid Use Disorder Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine › Pain Management and Opioid Use
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Healthcare Policy and Management
Keywords
long-term opioid therapy, opioid misuse, opioid use disorder, health care costs, natural language processing, electronic health records, healthcare resource utilization, integrated health system
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Analgesics, Opioid, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Medicare, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Middle Aged, Opioid-Related Disorders, Natural Language Processing, Retrospective Studies, United States, Case-Control Studies, Health Care Costs, Cost of Illness, Young Adult, Electronic Health Records

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review