In this PR, I have removed follow-up from the study definition as per @hjforbes discussion. Just to be clear this is different from RF study which only included you if you have a year of follow up at the same practice.
We should consider also putting in the study population some data cleaning - i.e. if IMD > 0, which we have in a couple of other studies. So far it is taking the whole population with age between 18 and 110 (which is BIG!). We might want to add IMD, Gender etc into this data cleaning here to speed things up as it will be quicker than stata.
I have created a new covariate for the sensitivity analysis, where it returns a 1.0 if the patient has at least 6 months of follow up in the same practice. @evansd - can you just check that this is correct in my understanding? It looks like with_complete_history isn't available in the TPP backend yet.
@alexwalkercebm can you sense check this PR? thanks - we already discussed. I can only request one reviewer but will look at any comments.
In this PR, I have removed follow-up from the study definition as per @hjforbes discussion. Just to be clear this is different from RF study which only included you if you have a year of follow up at the same practice.
We should consider also putting in the study population some data cleaning - i.e. if IMD > 0, which we have in a couple of other studies. So far it is taking the whole population with age between 18 and 110 (which is BIG!). We might want to add IMD, Gender etc into this data cleaning here to speed things up as it will be quicker than stata.
I have created a new covariate for the sensitivity analysis, where it returns a
1.0if the patient has at least 6 months of follow up in the same practice. @evansd - can you just check that this is correct in my understanding? It looks likewith_complete_historyisn't available in the TPP backend yet.@alexwalkercebm can you sense check this PR? thanks - we already discussed. I can only request one reviewer but will look at any comments.