Table 4.
Comparison of effectiveness algorithm versus effectiveness gold standard for biologic and nonbiologic disease-modifying agent in rheumatic disease** treatments
| Effectiveness gold standard*** | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Met effectiveness algorithm* | Yes | No | Total | PPV (95% CI) | NPV (95% CI) |
| Yes | 60 | 19 | 79 (26%) | 76% (71 to 81) | |
| No | 23 | 203 | 226 (74%) | 90% (88 to 92) | |
| Total | 83 (27%) | 222 (73%) | 305 (100%) | ||
| Se = 72% (95% CI = 67 to 77) |
Sp = 91% (95% CI = 89 to 93) |
||||
CI: confidence Interval; DMARD: disease-modifying; NPV: negative predictive value; PPV: positive predictive value; Se: sensitivity; Sp: specificity. *The components of the effectiveness algorithm are given in Table 1. **DMARDs include hydroxychloroquine, leflunomide and sulfasalazine. ***Defined as DAS28 ≤ 3.2 or DAS28 improvement by > 1.2 units and high adherence (for example, ≥ 80%) to the biologic and/or DMARD started on the index date.