Epidemiologic Reviews最新文献

{"title":"Epidemiologic Methods: Seeing the Forest and the Trees.","authors":"Kara E Rudolph, Bryan Lau","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxab010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxab010","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"1-3"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39856422","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Is the Way Forward to Step Back? Documenting the Frequency With Which Study Goals Are Misaligned With Study Methods and Interpretations in the Epidemiologic Literature.","authors":"Katrina L Kezios","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxab008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxab008","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In any research study, there is an underlying process that should begin with a clear articulation of the study's goal. The study's goal drives this process; it determines many study features, including the estimand of interest, the analytic approaches that can be used to estimate it, and which coefficients, if any, should be interpreted. Misalignment can occur in this process when analytic approaches and/or interpretations do not match the study's goal; misalignment is potentially more likely to arise when study goals are ambiguously framed. In this study, misalignment in the observational epidemiologic literature was documented and how the framing of study goals contributes to misalignment was explored. The following 2 misalignments were examined: use of an inappropriate variable selection approach for the goal (a \"goal-methods\" misalignment) and interpretation of coefficients of variables for which causal considerations were not made (e.g., Table 2 Fallacy, a \"goal-interpretation\" misalignment). A random sample of 100 articles published 2014-2018 in the top 5 general epidemiology journals were reviewed. Most reviewed studies were causal, with either explicitly stated (n = 13; 13%) or associational-framed (n = 71; 69%) aims. Full alignment of goal-methods-interpretations was infrequent (n = 9; 9%), although clearly causal studies (n = 5 of 13; 38%) were more often fully aligned than were seemingly causal ones (n = 3 of 71; 4%). Goal-methods misalignments were common (n = 34 of 103; 33%), but most frequently, methods were insufficiently reported to draw conclusions (n = 47; 46%). Goal-interpretations misalignments occurred in 31% (n = 32) of the studies and occurred less often when the methods were aligned (n = 2; 2%) compared with when the methods were misaligned (n = 13; 13%).</p>","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"4-18"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9005115/pdf/mxab008.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39426753","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Burden of Antimicrobial Resistance: Compared to What?","authors":"Marlieke E A de Kraker, Marc Lipsitch","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxab001","DOIUrl":"10.1093/epirev/mxab001","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The increased focus on the public health burden of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) raises conceptual challenges, such as determining how much harm multidrug-resistant organisms do compared to what, or how to establish the burden. Here, we present a counterfactual framework and provide guidance to harmonize methodologies and optimize study quality. In AMR-burden studies, 2 counterfactual approaches have been applied: the harm of drug-resistant infections relative to the harm of the same drug-susceptible infections (the susceptible-infection counterfactual); and the total harm of drug-resistant infections relative to a situation where such infections were prevented (the no-infection counterfactual). We propose to use an intervention-based causal approach to determine the most appropriate counterfactual. We show that intervention scenarios, species of interest, and types of infections influence the choice of counterfactual. We recommend using purpose-designed cohort studies to apply this counterfactual framework, whereby the selection of cohorts (patients with drug-resistant, drug-susceptible infections, and those with no infection) should be based on matching on time to infection through exposure density sampling to avoid biased estimates. Application of survival methods is preferred, considering competing events. We conclude by advocating estimation of the burden of AMR by using the no-infection and susceptible-infection counterfactuals. The resulting numbers will provide policy-relevant information about the upper and lower bound of future interventions designed to control AMR. The counterfactuals should be applied in cohort studies, whereby selection of the unexposed cohorts should be based on exposure density sampling, applying methods avoiding time-dependent bias and confounding.</p>","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":"43 1","pages":"53-64"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2022-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8763122/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"10425629","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Monte Carlo Simulation Approaches for Quantitative Bias Analysis: A Tutorial.","authors":"Hailey R Banack,&nbsp;Eleanor Hayes-Larson,&nbsp;Elizabeth Rose Mayeda","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxab012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxab012","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Quantitative bias analysis can be used to empirically assess how far study estimates are from the truth (i.e., an estimate that is free of bias). These methods can be used to explore the potential impact of confounding bias, selection bias (collider stratification bias), and information bias. Quantitative bias analysis includes methods that can be used to check the robustness of study findings to multiple types of bias and methods that use simulation studies to generate data and understand the hypothetical impact of specific types of bias in a simulated data set. In this article, we review 2 strategies for quantitative bias analysis: 1) traditional probabilistic quantitative bias analysis and 2) quantitative bias analysis with generated data. An important difference between the 2 strategies relates to the type of data (real vs. generated data) used in the analysis. Monte Carlo simulations are used in both approaches, but the simulation process is used for different purposes in each. For both approaches, we outline and describe the steps required to carry out the quantitative bias analysis and also present a bias-analysis tutorial demonstrating how both approaches can be applied in the context of an analysis for selection bias. Our goal is to highlight the utility of quantitative bias analysis for practicing epidemiologists and increase the use of these methods in the epidemiologic literature.</p>","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":" ","pages":"106-117"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2022-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9005059/pdf/mxab012.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"39529829","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Availability, Accessibility, and Coverage of Needle and Syringe Programs in Prisons in the European Union.","authors":"Babak Moazen,&nbsp;Kate Dolan,&nbsp;Sahar Saeedi Moghaddam,&nbsp;Masoud Lotfizadeh,&nbsp;Karen Duke,&nbsp;Florian Neuhann,&nbsp;Heino Stöver,&nbsp;Albrecht Jahn","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxaa003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxaa003","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Needle and syringe programs (NSPs) are among the most effective interventions for controlling the transmission of infection among people who inject drugs in prisons. We evaluated the availability, accessibility, and coverage of NSPs in prisons in European Union (EU) countries. In line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) criteria, we systematically searched 4 databases of peer-reviewed publications (MEDLINE (PubMed), ISI Web of Science, EBSCO, and ScienceDirect) and 53 databases containing gray literature to collect data published from January 2008 to August 2018. A total of 23,969 documents (17,297 papers and 6,672 gray documents) were identified, of which 26 were included in the study. In 2018, imprisonment rates in 28 EU countries ranged between 51 per 100,000 population in Finland and 235 per 100,000 population in Lithuania. Only 4 countries were found to have NSPs in prisons: Germany (in 1 prison), Luxembourg (no coverage data were found), Romania (available in more than 50% of prisons), and Spain (in all prisons). Portugal stopped an NSP after a 6-month pilot phase. Despite the protective impact of prison-based NSPs on infection transmission, only 4 EU countries distribute sterile syringes among people who inject drugs in prisons, and coverage of the programs within these countries is very low. Since most prisoners will eventually return to the community, lack of NSPs in EU prisons not only is a threat to the health of prisoners but also endangers public health.</p>","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":"42 1","pages":"19-26"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/epirev/mxaa003","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38463951","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Assessment of Co-Occurring Substance Use During Opiate Treatment Programs in the United States.","authors":"Mirinda Ann Gormley,&nbsp;Courtney T Blondino,&nbsp;DaShaunda D H Taylor,&nbsp;Elizabeth Lowery,&nbsp;James S Clifford,&nbsp;Benjamin Burkart,&nbsp;Whitney C Graves,&nbsp;Elizabeth C Prom-Wormley,&nbsp;Juan Lu","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxaa009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxaa009","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The effectiveness of opiate treatment programs (OTPs) can be significantly influenced by co-occurring substance use, yet there are no standardized guidelines for assessing the influence of co-occurring substance use on treatment outcomes. In this review, we aim to provide an overview on the status of the assessment of co-occurring substance use during participation in OTPs in the United States. We searched 4 databases-MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, PsychINFO, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL)-from database inception to November 2018 to select relevant publications on OTPs that assessed participants' co-occurring substance use. We used a standardized protocol to extract study, intervention, and co-occurring substance use characteristics. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality in Prognosis Studies tool. Of the 3,219 titles screened, 614 abstracts and 191 full-text original publications were assessed, leaving 85 eligible articles. Co-occurring substance use was most often assessed during opioid treatments using combined (pharmacological and behavioral) (n = 57 studies) and pharmacological (n = 25 studies) interventions. Cocaine, alcohol, marijuana, and benzodiazepines were frequently measured, while amphetamines and tobacco were rarely assessed. Great variation existed between studies in the timing and measurement of co-occurring substance use, as well as definitions for substances and polysubstance/polydrug use. Inconsistencies in the investigation of co-occurring substance use make comparison of results across studies challenging. Standardized measures and consensus on research on co-occurring substance use is needed to produce the evidence required to develop personalized treatment programs for persons using multiple substances and to inform best-practice guidelines for addressing polydrug use during participation in OTPs.</p>","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":"42 1","pages":"79-102"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/epirev/mxaa009","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38499545","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Policing Practices and Risk of HIV Infection Among People Who Inject Drugs.","authors":"Pieter Baker, Leo Beletsky, Liliana Avalos, Christopher Venegas, Carlos Rivera, Steffanie A Strathdee, Javier Cepeda","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxaa010","DOIUrl":"10.1093/epirev/mxaa010","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Drug-law enforcement constitutes a structural determinant of health among people who inject drugs (PWID). Street encounters between police and PWID (e.g., syringe confiscation, physical assault) have been associated with health harms, but these relationships have not been systematically assessed. We conducted a systematic literature review to evaluate the contribution of policing to risk of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection among PWID. We screened MEDLINE, sociological databases, and gray literature for studies published from 1981 to November 2018 that included estimates of HIV infection/risk behaviors and street policing encounters. We extracted and summarized quantitative findings from all eligible studies. We screened 8,201 abstracts, reviewed 175 full-text articles, and included 27 eligible analyses from 9 countries (Canada, China, India, Malaysia, Mexico, Russia, Thailand, Ukraine, and the United States). Heterogeneity in variable and endpoint selection precluded meta-analyses. In 5 (19%) studies, HIV infection among PWID was significantly associated with syringe confiscation, reluctance to buy/carry syringes for fear of police, rushed injection due to a police presence, fear of arrest, being arrested for planted drugs, and physical abuse. Twenty-one (78%) studies identified policing practices to be associated with HIV risk behaviors related to injection drug use (e.g., syringe-sharing, using a \"shooting gallery\"). In 9 (33%) studies, policing was associated with PWID avoidance of harm reduction services, including syringe exchange, methadone maintenance, and safe consumption facilities. Evidence suggests that policing shapes HIV risk among PWID, but lower-income settings are underrepresented. Curbing injection-related HIV risk necessitates additional structural interventions. Methodological harmonization could facilitate knowledge generation on the role of police as a determinant of population health.</p>","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":"42 1","pages":"27-40"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7879596/pdf/mxaa010.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38692899","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Role of Evidence in the US Response to the Opioid Crisis.","authors":"Joshua M Sharfstein,&nbsp;Yngvild Olsen","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxaa004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxaa004","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The National Institutes of Health is investing hundreds of millions of dollars into new research on opioids. As these studies yield insights and results, their results will have to change policy and practice before they can bend the curve of the epidemic. However, the United States does not have a strong track record of translating evidence on drug policy into action. Three reasons for the translation gap are the historical legacy of drugs in the United States, vested interests, and politics. Researchers can become engaged in policy and political processes to strengthen the US response.</p>","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":"42 1","pages":"167-170"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/epirev/mxaa004","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38518971","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Influence of Co-Occurring Substance Use on the Effectiveness of Opiate Treatment Programs According to Intervention Type.","authors":"Courtney T Blondino,&nbsp;Mirinda Ann Gormley,&nbsp;DaShaunda D H Taylor,&nbsp;Elizabeth Lowery,&nbsp;James S Clifford,&nbsp;Benjamin Burkart,&nbsp;Whitney C Graves,&nbsp;Juan Lu,&nbsp;Elizabeth C Prom-Wormley","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxaa005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/epirev/mxaa005","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This systematic review describes the influence of co-occurring substance use on the effectiveness of opiate treatment programs. MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO, and the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were searched from database inception to November 28, 2018, to identify eligible opioid treatment studies in the United States that assessed the relationship between co-occurring substance use and treatment outcome (i.e., opioid abstinence and treatment retention). A total of 34 eligible studies were included. Overall, co-occurring substance use was associated with negative treatment outcomes regardless of intervention type. However, patterns varied by substance and intervention type. In particular, co-occurring use of cocaine or marijuana with opioids was associated with reduced treatment retention and opioid abstinence regardless of intervention type. Co-occurring use of amphetamines, compared with no use or reduced use of amphetamines, decreased treatment retention. Co-occurring use of alcohol was both positively and negatively associated with treatment outcomes. One study reported a significant positive association between sedative use and opioid abstinence. Generally, findings suggest that combined interventions reported better health outcomes compared with pharmacological or behavioral intervention studies alone. The findings of this review emphasize the need to comprehensively study and address co-occurring substance use to improve opiate treatment programs.</p>","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":"42 1","pages":"57-78"},"PeriodicalIF":5.5,"publicationDate":"2020-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/epirev/mxaa005","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38394890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Evolving Overdose Epidemic: Synthetic Opioids and Rising Stimulant-Related Harms.","authors":"Christopher M Jones, Faraah Bekheet, Ju Nyeong Park, G Caleb Alexander","doi":"10.1093/epirev/mxaa011","DOIUrl":"10.1093/epirev/mxaa011","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The opioid overdose epidemic is typically described as having occurred in 3 waves, with morbidity and mortality accruing over time principally from prescription opioids (1999-2010), heroin (2011-2013), and illicit fentanyl and other synthetic opioids (2014-present). However, the increasing presence of synthetic opioids mixed into the illicit drug supply, including with stimulants such as cocaine and methamphetamine, as well as rising stimulant-related deaths, reflects the rapidly evolving nature of the overdose epidemic, posing urgent and novel public health challenges. We synthesize the evidence underlying these trends, consider key questions such as where and how concomitant exposure to fentanyl and stimulants is occurring, and identify actions for key stakeholders regarding how these emerging threats, and continued evolution of the overdose epidemic, can best be addressed.</p>","PeriodicalId":50510,"journal":{"name":"Epidemiologic Reviews","volume":"42 1","pages":"154-166"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2020-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9200066/pdf/nihms-1805062.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38873254","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}