Key result
Real-world Japanese claims data offers a valuable alternative to RCTs when trials are unfeasible.
Why the study?
Randomized controlled trials and real-world data studies complement each other, and real-world data offer a valuable alternative when trials are not feasible.
This narrative review provides guidance on selecting appropriate Japanese administrative claims databases for real-world data research.
May facilitate real-world cardiovascular studies in Japan; extends database guidance but leaves generalizability open.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and studies using real-world data (RWD) each have their strengths and weaknesses, and can effectively complement each other. When RCTs are not feasible, RWD studies offer a valuable alternative. In this narrative review, we examine several types of RWD studies, focusing on studies utilizing administrative claims databases. These include the Diagnosis Procedure Combination databases, commercially available health checkups and healthcare claims databases (such as the JDMC and DeSC databases), and the National Database of Health Insurance Claims and Specific Health Checkups of Japan (NDB). Given that these claims databases cover different populations, patient settings, variables, and levels of accessibility, it is crucial for researchers to select the most appropriate data source to effectively address their research questions. Additionally, it is desirable for readers of studies using these databases to be aware of their characteristics in order to fully understand the context and limitations of the research findings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kimura et al. (2024) reported a review. Real-world data (RWD) studies was evaluated. Real-world data studies using administrative claims databases in Japan offer a valuable alternative to randomized controlled trials when RCTs are not feasible.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: