Back

Standardisation of terminology, calculation and reporting for assigning exposure duration to drug utilisation records from healthcare data sources: the CreateDoT framework

Riera-Arnau, J.; Paoletti, O.; Gini, R.; Thurin, N. H.; Souverein, P. C.; Abtahi, S.; Duran, C. E.; Pajouheshnia, R.; Roberto, G.

2026-02-19 epidemiology
10.64898/2026.02.18.26346576 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundIn pharmacoepidemiological studies, days of treatment (DoT) duration associated with individual electronic drug utilization records (DUR) are usually missing. Researcher-defined duration (RDD) calculation approaches, as opposed to data-driven approaches, can be used to estimate DoT based on the specific choices and assumptions made by investigators. These are usually underreported or even undocumented. We aimed to develop a framework for the standardization of terminology, formulas, implementation, and reporting of possible RDD approaches. MethodsA systematic classification of RDD calculation approaches was developed via expert consensus. Universal concepts used to operationalise RDDs were identified and described using standard terminologies. An open-source R function, CreateDoT, was created to implement the formulas universal concepts as input parameter. A step-by-step workflow was developed to facilitate implementation and reporting. ResultsRDD approaches were classified in two main classes: I) daily dose (DD)-based calculation approaches (n=3 formulas), and II) fixed-duration approaches (n=2). Seven universal concepts were identified to describe the five corresponding generalized formulas for DoT calculation. Input parameters of the CreateDoT function can be retrieved from source data through its mapping to universal concepts, or inputted by the investigator based on the chosen calculation approach. The input file structure itself represents a standard reporting template for documenting investigators assumptions and methodological choices adopted for DoT calculation. ConclusionsThe CreateDoT framework can facilitate the documentation and reporting of RDD approaches for DoT calculation, increasing transparency and reproducibility of pharmacoepidemiological studies regardless of the data model used, and facilitates sensitivity analyses to evaluate the impact of alternative assumptions in DoT calculation.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
27.9%
2
BMC Medical Research Methodology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.6%
3
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 27%
6.4%
4
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
28 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.4%
50% of probability mass above
5
Research Synthesis Methods
20 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
6
BMC Medicine
163 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.3%
7
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 7%
2.6%
8
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
9
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
10
Clinical and Translational Science
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
11
American Journal of Epidemiology
57 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
12
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
61 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
13
Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
25 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.5%
14
npj Digital Medicine
97 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
15
International Journal of Epidemiology
74 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
16
Frontiers in Pharmacology
100 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
17
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 58%
1.0%
18
PLOS Medicine
98 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
19
BMJ
49 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.9%
20
Journal of Biomedical Informatics
45 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.9%
21
Journal of Medical Internet Research
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
22
Eurosurveillance
80 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%
23
Frontiers in Public Health
140 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.8%
24
Wellcome Open Research
57 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
25
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making
39 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
JMIR Public Health and Surveillance
45 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.6%
27
BMC Infectious Diseases
118 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.6%
28
JAMA Network Open
127 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.5%
29
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 80%
0.5%
30
Systematic Reviews
11 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.5%