Pharmacoepidemiology for nephrologists (part 2) : potential biases and how to overcome them
© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA..
Observational pharmacoepidemiological studies using routinely collected healthcare data are increasingly being used in the field of nephrology to answer questions on the effectiveness and safety of medications. This review discusses a number of biases that may arise in such studies and proposes solutions to minimize them during the design or statistical analysis phase. We first describe designs to handle confounding by indication (e.g. active comparator design) and methods to investigate the influence of unmeasured confounding, such as the E-value, the use of negative control outcomes and control cohorts. We next discuss prevalent user and immortal time biases in pharmacoepidemiology research and how these can be prevented by focussing on incident users and applying either landmarking, using a time-varying exposure, or the cloning, censoring and weighting method. Lastly, we briefly discuss the common issues with missing data and misclassification bias. When these biases are properly accounted for, pharmacoepidemiological observational studies can provide valuable information for clinical practice.
| Medienart: |
E-Artikel |
|---|
| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2021 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2021 |
| Enthalten in: |
Zur Gesamtaufnahme - volume:14 |
|---|---|
| Enthalten in: |
Clinical kidney journal - 14(2021), 5 vom: 21. Mai, Seite 1317-1326 |
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Fu, Edouard L [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
Bias |
|---|
| Anmerkungen: |
Date Revised 01.04.2024 published: Electronic-eCollection Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1093/ckj/sfaa242 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
NLM325111200 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | NLM325111200 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240401232208.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 231225s2021 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1093/ckj/sfaa242 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a pubmed24n1359.xml |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)NLM325111200 | ||
| 035 | |a (NLM)33959262 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Fu, Edouard L |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Pharmacoepidemiology for nephrologists (part 2) |b potential biases and how to overcome them |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2021 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a ƒaComputermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a ƒa Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a Date Revised 01.04.2024 | ||
| 500 | |a published: Electronic-eCollection | ||
| 500 | |a Citation Status PubMed-not-MEDLINE | ||
| 520 | |a © The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of ERA-EDTA. | ||
| 520 | |a Observational pharmacoepidemiological studies using routinely collected healthcare data are increasingly being used in the field of nephrology to answer questions on the effectiveness and safety of medications. This review discusses a number of biases that may arise in such studies and proposes solutions to minimize them during the design or statistical analysis phase. We first describe designs to handle confounding by indication (e.g. active comparator design) and methods to investigate the influence of unmeasured confounding, such as the E-value, the use of negative control outcomes and control cohorts. We next discuss prevalent user and immortal time biases in pharmacoepidemiology research and how these can be prevented by focussing on incident users and applying either landmarking, using a time-varying exposure, or the cloning, censoring and weighting method. Lastly, we briefly discuss the common issues with missing data and misclassification bias. When these biases are properly accounted for, pharmacoepidemiological observational studies can provide valuable information for clinical practice | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Journal Article | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a bias | |
| 650 | 4 | |a causal inference | |
| 650 | 4 | |a confounding | |
| 650 | 4 | |a epidemiologic methods | |
| 650 | 4 | |a observational studies | |
| 650 | 4 | |a pharmacoepidemiology | |
| 700 | 1 | |a van Diepen, Merel |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Xu, Yang |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Trevisan, Marco |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Dekker, Friedo W |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Zoccali, Carmine |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jager, Kitty |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Carrero, Juan Jesus |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Clinical kidney journal |d 2012 |g 14(2021), 5 vom: 21. Mai, Seite 1317-1326 |w (DE-627)NLM219739579 |x 2048-8505 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:14 |g year:2021 |g number:5 |g day:21 |g month:05 |g pages:1317-1326 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfaa242 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_NLM | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 14 |j 2021 |e 5 |b 21 |c 05 |h 1317-1326 | ||