Dataset Information

Measured and accounted-for confounding in pharmacoepidemiologic studies: Some thoughts for practitioners.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Valid causal inference from observational pharmacoepidemiologic studies relies on adequately adjusting for confounding.

Aims

The goal of this article is to provide clarity and guidance on issues related to confounding and provide motivation for using more flexible models for causal inference in pharmacoepidemiology.

Materials & methods

In this article we elucidate two important components of making valid inference from observational data: measuring the necessary set of variables at the design/data collection phase (measured confounding) and properly accounting for confounding at the modeling/analysis phase (accounted-for confounding). For the latter concept, we contrast parametric modeling approaches, which are susceptible to model misspecification bias, with data adaptive approaches.

Discussion

Both measuring and properly accounting for confounding is critical to obtaining valid causal inference from pharmacoepidemiology studies. Carefully thought out DAGs, based on subject matter knowledge, can help to better identify confounders and confounding. Even when confounding has been adequately measured, mis-specified models may lead to unaccounted for confounding and increasing the sample size often does not help. We recommend modern analytic techniques such as flexible data adaptive approaches that do not rely on strong parametric assumptions. Further, sensitivity analyses and other modern bounding approaches are recommended to account for the effects of unmeasured confounding.

Conclusion

Confounding must be considered at both the design and analysis stages of a study. DAGs and data adaptive approaches can help.

SUBMITTER: Roy J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8635757 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Numerous observational studies suggest that bisphosphonates reduce mortality. This study showed that bisphosphonate use is associated with lower mortality within days of treatment, although the association was not significant until the second week. Such an early association is consistent with confounding, although an early treatment effect cannot be ruled out.IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to examine whether confounding explains why numerous observational studies show that bisphosphonate use is associated with lower mortality. To this end, we examined how soon after treatment initiation a lower mortality rate can be observed. We hypothesized that, due to confounding, the association would be observed immediately.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of hip fracture patients discharged from Swedish hospitals between 1 July 2006 and 31 December 2015. The data covered 260,574 hip fracture patients and were obtained from the Swedish Hip Fracture Register and national registers. Of the 260,574 patients, 49,765 met all eligibility criteria and 10,178 were pair matched (bisphosphonate users to controls) using time-dependent propensity scores. The matching variables were age, sex, diagnoses, prescription medications, type of hip fracture, type of surgical procedure, known or suspected dementia, and physical functioning status.ResultsOver a median follow-up of 2.8 years, 2922 of the 10,178 matched patients died. The mortality rate was 7.9 deaths per 100 person-years in bisphosphonate users and 9.4 deaths in controls, which corresponded to a 15% lower mortality rate in bisphosphonate users (hazard ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.79-0.91). The risk of death was lower in bisphosphonate users from day 6 of treatment, although the association was not significant until the second week.ConclusionBisphosphonate use was associated with lower mortality within days of treatment initiation. This finding is consistent with confounding, although an early treatment effect cannot be ruled out.