Academic Impact of a Public Electronic Health Database: Bibliometric Analysis of Studies Using the General Practice Research Database

BACKGROUND: Studies that use electronic health databases as research material are getting popular but the influence of a single electronic health database had not been well investigated yet. The United Kingdom's General Practice Research Database (GPRD) is one of the few electronic health databases publicly available to academic researchers. This study analyzed studies that used GPRD to demonstrate the scientific production and academic impact by a single public health database. METHODOLOGY AND FINDINGS: A total of 749 studies published between 1995 and 2009 with 'General Practice Research Database' as their topics, defined as GPRD studies, were extracted from Web of Science. By the end of 2009, the GPRD had attracted 1251 authors from 22 countries and been used extensively in 749 studies published in 193 journals across 58 study fields. Each GPRD study was cited 2.7 times by successive studies. Moreover, the total number of GPRD studies increased rapidly, and it is expected to reach 1500 by 2015, twice the number accumulated till the end of 2009. Since 17 of the most prolific authors (1.4% of all authors) contributed nearly half (47.9%) of GPRD studies, success in conducting GPRD studies may accumulate. The GPRD was used mainly in, but not limited to, the three study fields of "Pharmacology and Pharmacy", "General and Internal Medicine", and "Public, Environmental and Occupational Health". The UK and United States were the two most active regions of GPRD studies. One-third of GRPD studies were internationally co-authored. CONCLUSIONS: A public electronic health database such as the GPRD will promote scientific production in many ways. Data owners of electronic health databases at a national level should consider how to reduce access barriers and to make data more available for research

Analysis of drug-drug interactions in Swiss claims data using tizanidine and ciprofloxacin as a prototypical contraindicated combination

BACKGROUND: Potential drug-drug interactions (pDDIs) are described in various case reports, but few studies have evaluated the impact of specific combinations on a population level. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the type and frequency of multiple contraindicated (X-pDDIs) and major interactions (D-pDDIs) and to subsequently assess the impact of the particular combination of tizanidine and ciprofloxacin on outpatient physician visits and hospitalizations. METHODS: Anonymized Swiss claims data from 524 797 patients in 2014-2015 were analyzed. First, frequencies of X- and D-pDDIs were calculated. Next, a retrospective cohort study was conducted among patients prescribed tizanidine and ciprofloxacin (exposed, n = 199) or tizanidine and other antibiotics (unexposed, n = 960). Hospitalizations and outpatient physician visits within 7, 14, and 30 days after initiation of antibiotic therapy were evaluated using multiple binary logistic regression and multiple linear regression. RESULTS: The relative frequencies of X- and D-pDDIs were 0.4% and 6.65%, respectively. In the cohort study, significant associations between exposure to tizanidine and ciprofloxacin and outpatient physician visits were identified for 14 and 30 days (odds ratio [OR] = 1.61 [95% CI = 1.17-2.24], P = 0.004, and OR = 1.59 [95% CI = 1.1-2.34], P = 0.016). A trend for increased risk of hospitalization was found for all evaluated time periods (OR = 1.68 [95% CI = 0.84-3.17], OR = 1.52 [95% CI = 0.63-3.33], and OR = 2.19 [95% CI = 0.88-5.02]). CONCLUSION and RELEVANCE: The interaction between tizanidine and ciprofloxacin is not only relevant for individual patients, but also at the population level. Further investigation of the impact of other clinically relevant DDIs is necessary to improve patient safety and reduce avoidable health care utilization