Core Concepts in Pharmacoepidemiology: Quantitative Bias Analysis.

IF 2.4 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Jeremy P Brown, Jacob N Hunnicutt, M Sanni Ali, Krishnan Bhaskaran, Ashley Cole, Sinead M Langan, Dorothea Nitsch, Christopher T Rentsch, Nicholas W Galwey, Kevin Wing, Ian J Douglas
{"title":"Core Concepts in Pharmacoepidemiology: Quantitative Bias Analysis.","authors":"Jeremy P Brown, Jacob N Hunnicutt, M Sanni Ali, Krishnan Bhaskaran, Ashley Cole, Sinead M Langan, Dorothea Nitsch, Christopher T Rentsch, Nicholas W Galwey, Kevin Wing, Ian J Douglas","doi":"10.1002/pds.70026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Pharmacoepidemiological studies provide important information on the safety and effectiveness of medications, but the validity of study findings can be threatened by residual bias. Ideally, biases would be minimized through appropriate study design and statistical analysis methods. However, residual biases can remain, for example, due to unmeasured confounders, measurement error, or selection into the study. A group of sensitivity analysis methods, termed quantitative bias analyses, are available to assess, quantitatively and transparently, the robustness of study results to these residual biases. These approaches include methods to quantify how the estimated effect would be altered under specified assumptions about the potential bias, and methods to calculate bounds on effect estimates. This article introduces quantitative bias analyses for unmeasured confounding, misclassification, and selection bias, with a focus on their relevance and application to pharmacoepidemiological studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":19782,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","volume":"33 10","pages":"e70026"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.70026","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Pharmacoepidemiological studies provide important information on the safety and effectiveness of medications, but the validity of study findings can be threatened by residual bias. Ideally, biases would be minimized through appropriate study design and statistical analysis methods. However, residual biases can remain, for example, due to unmeasured confounders, measurement error, or selection into the study. A group of sensitivity analysis methods, termed quantitative bias analyses, are available to assess, quantitatively and transparently, the robustness of study results to these residual biases. These approaches include methods to quantify how the estimated effect would be altered under specified assumptions about the potential bias, and methods to calculate bounds on effect estimates. This article introduces quantitative bias analyses for unmeasured confounding, misclassification, and selection bias, with a focus on their relevance and application to pharmacoepidemiological studies.

药物流行病学的核心概念:定量偏差分析。
药物流行病学研究提供了有关药物安全性和有效性的重要信息,但研究结果的有效性可能会受到残留偏倚的威胁。理想的情况是,通过适当的研究设计和统计分析方法将偏差降至最低。然而,残余偏倚可能仍然存在,例如,由于未测量的混杂因素、测量误差或研究选择等原因造成的偏倚。有一组被称为定量偏倚分析的敏感性分析方法,可以定量、透明地评估研究结果对这些残余偏倚的稳健性。这些方法包括量化在特定的潜在偏倚假设下估计效果会如何变化的方法,以及计算效果估计值界限的方法。本文介绍了针对未测量混杂因素、误分类和选择偏倚的定量偏倚分析,重点介绍了这些方法在药物流行病学研究中的相关性和应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
173
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The aim of Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety is to provide an international forum for the communication and evaluation of data, methods and opinion in the discipline of pharmacoepidemiology. The Journal publishes peer-reviewed reports of original research, invited reviews and a variety of guest editorials and commentaries embracing scientific, medical, statistical, legal and economic aspects of pharmacoepidemiology and post-marketing surveillance of drug safety. Appropriate material in these categories may also be considered for publication as a Brief Report. Particular areas of interest include: design, analysis, results, and interpretation of studies looking at the benefit or safety of specific pharmaceuticals, biologics, or medical devices, including studies in pharmacovigilance, postmarketing surveillance, pharmacoeconomics, patient safety, molecular pharmacoepidemiology, or any other study within the broad field of pharmacoepidemiology; comparative effectiveness research relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics, and medical devices. Comparative effectiveness research is the generation and synthesis of evidence that compares the benefits and harms of alternative methods to prevent, diagnose, treat, and monitor a clinical condition, as these methods are truly used in the real world; methodologic contributions of relevance to pharmacoepidemiology, whether original contributions, reviews of existing methods, or tutorials for how to apply the methods of pharmacoepidemiology; assessments of harm versus benefit in drug therapy; patterns of drug utilization; relationships between pharmacoepidemiology and the formulation and interpretation of regulatory guidelines; evaluations of risk management plans and programmes relating to pharmaceuticals, biologics and medical devices.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信