The study implemented six published rules for detecting statin intolerance from electronic records in an Australian general-practice research network dataset. Each rule was then tested against a reference standard developed locally for that dataset. Among patients prescribed statins for primary prevention, 5.09% met the reference standard, at the lower end of the 5-15% reported in Australia and internationally. The most sensitive rule picked up 92.95% of these patients, but was correct on only 57.05% of all patients it classified. Another rule wrongly flagged almost no one, with specificity of 99.13%, and 76.19% of those it did flag met the reference standard. Agreement was weak for every rule, and the reference standard itself came from a single research network.
Why it is interesting: Rules for detecting statin intolerance from records are being proposed as the basis for prescribing decision support. Applied to the same Australian records, they picked out substantially different patients, and none matched the local reference standard.
Cite this item
BibTeX
Free sign-up. A digest of the new papers twice a week, grouped by domain.