"We adjusted for race": now what? A systematic review of utilization and reporting of race in American Journal of Epidemiology and Epidemiology, 2020-2021.

Race is a social construct, commonly used in epidemiologic research to adjust for confounding. However, adjustment of race may mask racial disparities, thereby perpetuating structural racism. We conducted a systematic review of articles published in Epidemiology and American Journal of Epidemiology between 2020 and 2021 to (1) understand how race, ethnicity, and similar social constructs were operationalized, used, and reported; and (2) characterize good and poor practices of utilization and reporting of race data on the basis of the extent to which they reveal or mask systemic racism. Original research articles were considered for full review and data extraction if race data were used in the study analysis. We extracted how race was categorized, used-as a descriptor, confounder, or for effect measure modification (EMM)-and reported if the authors discussed racial disparities and systemic bias-related mechanisms responsible for perpetuating the disparities. Of the 561 articles, 299 had race data available and 192 (34.2%) used race data in analyses. Among the 160 US-based studies, 81 different racial categorizations were used. Race was most often used as a confounder (52%), followed by effect measure modifier (33%), and descriptive variable (12%). Fewer than 1 in 4 articles (22.9%) exhibited good practices (EMM along with discussing disparities and mechanisms), 63.5% of the articles exhibited poor practices (confounding only or not discussing mechanisms), and 13.5% were considered neither poor nor good practices. We discuss implications and provide 13 recommendations for operationalization, utilization, and reporting of race in epidemiologic and public health research.

Development and validation of an electronic health records-based opioid use disorder algorithm by expert clinical adjudication among patients with prescribed opioids.

BACKGROUND: In the US, over 200 lives are lost from opioid overdoses each day. Accurate and prompt diagnosis of opioid use disorders (OUD) may help prevent overdose deaths. However, international classification of disease (ICD) codes for OUD are known to underestimate prevalence, and their specificity and sensitivity are unknown. We developed and validated algorithms to identify OUD in electronic health records (EHR) and examined the validity of OUD ICD codes. METHODS: Through four iterations, we developed EHR-based OUD identification algorithms among patients who were prescribed opioids from 2014 to 2017. The algorithms and OUD ICD codes were validated against 169 independent "gold standard" EHR chart reviews conducted by an expert adjudication panel across four healthcare systems. After using 2014-2020 EHR for validating iteration 1, the experts were advised to use 2014-2017 EHR thereafter. RESULTS: Of the 169 EHR charts, 81 (48%) were reviewed by more than one expert and exhibited 85% expert agreement. The experts identified 54 OUD cases. The experts endorsed all 11 OUD criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-5, including craving (72%), tolerance (65%), withdrawal (56%), and recurrent use in physically hazardous conditions (50%). The OUD ICD codes had 10% sensitivity and 99% specificity, underscoring large underestimation. In comparison our algorithm identified OUD with 23% sensitivity and 98% specificity. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: This is the first study to estimate the validity of OUD ICD codes and develop validated EHR-based OUD identification algorithms. This work will inform future research on early intervention and prevention of OUD.

Trajectories and correlates of opioid prescription receipt among patients experiencing interpersonal violence.

Interpersonal violence increases vulnerability to the deleterious effects of opioid use. Increased opioid prescription receipt is a major contributor to the opioid crisis; however, our understanding of prescription patterns and risk factors among those with a history of interpersonal violence remains elusive. This study sought to identify 5-year longitudinal patterns of opioid prescription receipt among patients experiencing interpersonal violence within a large healthcare system and sociodemographic and clinical characteristics associated with prescription patterns. This secondary analysis examined electronic health record data from January 2004-August 2019 for a cohort of patients (N = 1,587) referred for interpersonal violence services. Latent class growth analysis was used to estimate trajectories of opioid prescription receipt over a 5-year period. Standardized differences were calculated to assess variation in sociodemographic and clinical characteristics between classes. Our cohort had a high prevalence of prescription opioid receipt (73.3%) and underlying co-morbidities, including chronic pain (54.6%), substance use disorders (39.0%), and mental health diagnoses (76.9%). Six prescription opioid receipt classes emerged, characterized by probability of any prescription opioid receipt at the start and end of the study period (high, medium, low, never) and change in probability over time (increasing, decreasing, stable). Classes with the highest probability of prescription opioids also had the highest proportions of males, chronic pain diagnoses, substance use disorders, and mental health diagnoses. Black, non-Hispanic and Hispanic patients were more likely to be in low or no prescription opioid receipt classes. These findings highlight the importance of monitoring for synergistic co-morbidities when providing pain management and offering treatment that is trauma-informed, destigmatizing, and integrated into routine care.