Table 3.
Comparison of effectiveness algorithm versus effectiveness gold standard for biologic users
| Effectiveness gold standard* | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Met effectiveness algorithm** | Yes | No | Total | PPV (95% CI) | NPV (95% CI) |
| Yes | 42 | 14 | 56 (28%) | 75% (62 to 86) | |
| No | 14 | 127 | 141 (72%) | 90% (84 to 94) | |
| Total | 56 (28%) | 141 (72%) | 197 (100%) | ||
| Se 75% (95% CI = 62 to 86) |
Sp 90% (95% CI = 84 to 94) |
||||
CI: confidence interval; NPV: negative predictive value; PPV: positive predictive value; Se: sensitivity; Sp: specificity. *DAS28 ≤ 3.2 or DAS28 improvement by > 1.2 units and high adherence (for example, ≥ 80%) to the biologic started on the index date. **The components of the effectiveness algorithm are shown in Table 1.