Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 57, Issue 12 , Pages 1223-1231 , December 2004

Methods to assess intended effects of drug treatment in observational studies are reviewed

  • Olaf H. Klungel

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacotherapy, Utrecht Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, Sorbonnelaan 16, 3584 CA Utrecht, the Netherlands
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +31 30 253 7324; fax: +31 30 253 9166.
    • ,
  • Edwin P. Martens

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacotherapy, Utrecht Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, Sorbonnelaan 16, 3584 CA Utrecht, the Netherlands
    • Centre for Biostatistics, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands
    • ,
  • Bruce M. Psaty

      Affiliations

    • Cardiovascular Health Research Unit, Medicine, Health Services, and Epidemiology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
    • ,
  • Diederik E. Grobbee

      Affiliations

    • Julius Centre for Health Sciences and Primary Care, Utrecht Medical Centre (UMC), Utrecht, the Netherlands
    • ,
  • Sean D. Sullivan

      Affiliations

    • Departments of Pharmacy and Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
    • ,
  • Bruno H.Ch. Stricker

      Affiliations

    • Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands
    • ,
  • Hubert G.M. Leufkens

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacotherapy, Utrecht Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, Sorbonnelaan 16, 3584 CA Utrecht, the Netherlands
    • ,
  • A. de Boer

      Affiliations

    • Department of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacotherapy, Utrecht Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences (UIPS), Utrecht University, Sorbonnelaan 16, 3584 CA Utrecht, the Netherlands

,Accepted 30 March 2004.

References 

  1. Friedman LM, Furberg CD, DeMets DL. Fundamentals of clinical trials. St Louis: Mosby-Year Book; 1996;
  2. Chalmers I. Why transition from alternation to randomisation in clinical trials was made. [Letter] BMJ. 1999;319:1372
  3. Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Allocation concealment in randomised trials: defending against deciphering. Lancet. 2002;359:614–618
  4. Urbach P. The value of randomization and control in clinical trials. Stat Med. 1993;12:1421–1431discussion 1433–41
  5. Feinstein AR. Current problems and future challenges in randomized clinical trials. Circulation. 1984;70:767–774
  6. Gurwitz JH, Col NF, Avorn J. The exclusion of the elderly and women from clinical trials in acute myocardial infarction. JAMA. 1992;268:1417–1422
  7. Wieringa NF, de Graeff PA, van der Werf GT, Vos R. Cardiovascular drugs: discrepancies in demographics between pre- and post-registration use. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1999;55:537–544
  8. MacMahon S, Collins R. Reliable assessment of the effects of treatment on mortality and major morbidity, II: observational studies. Lancet. 2001;357:455–462
  9. McKee M, Britton A, Black N, McPherson K, Sanderson C, Bain C. Methods in health services research. Interpreting the evidence: choosing between randomised and non-randomised studies. BMJ. 1999;319:312–315
  10. Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz RI. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1887–1892
  11. Grodstein F, Clarkson TB, Manson JE. Understanding the divergent data on postmenopausal hormone therapy. N Engl J Med. 2003;348:645–650
  12. Beral V, Banks E, Reeves G. Evidence from randomised trials on the long-term effects of hormone replacement therapy. Lancet. 2002;360:942–944
  13. Messerli FH. Case–control study, meta-analysis, and bouillabaisse: putting the calcium antagonist scare into context. [Editorial] Ann Intern Med. 1995;123:888–889
  14. Grobbee DE, Hoes AW. Confounding and indication for treatment in evaluation of drug treatment for hypertension. BMJ. 1997;315:1151–1154
  15. Rosenbaum PR. Observational studies. 2nd edition. New York: Springer; 2002;
  16. Sacks H, Chalmers TC, Smith H. Randomized versus historical controls for clinical trials. Am J Med. 1982;72:233–240
  17. Kalra L, Yu G, Perez I, Lakhani A, Donaldson N. Prospective cohort study to determine if trial efficacy of anticoagulation for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation translates into clinical effectiveness. BMJ. 2000;320:1236–1239
  18. Ioannidis JP, Polycarpou A, Ntais C, Pavlidis N. Randomised trials comparing chemotherapy regimens for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: biases and evolution over time. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39:2278–2287
  19. Klungel OH, Stricker BH, Breteler MM, Seidell JC, Psaty BM, de Boer A. Is drug treatment of hypertension in clinical practice as effective as in randomized controlled trials with regard to the reduction of the incidence of stroke?. Epidemiology. 2001;12:339–344
  20. Johnston SC. Identifying confounding by indication through blinded prospective review. Am J Epidemiol. 2001;154:276–284
  21. Psaty BM, Heckbert SR, Koepsell TD, Siscovick DS, Raghunathan TE, Weiss NS, et al. The risk of myocardial infarction associated with antihypertensive drug therapies. JAMA. 1995;274:620–625
  22. Klungel OH, Heckbert SR, Longstreth WT, Furberg CD, Kaplan RC, Smith NL, et al. Antihypertensive drug therapies and the risk of ischemic stroke. Arch Intern Med. 2001;161:37–43
  23. Abi-Said D, Annegers JF, Combs-Cantrell D, Suki R, Frankowski RF, Willmore LJ. A case–control evaluation of treatment efficacy: the example of magnesium sulfate prophylaxis against eclampsia in patients with preeclampsia. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:419–423
  24. Concato J, Peduzzi P, Kamina A, Horwitz RI. A nested case–control study of the effectiveness of screening for prostate cancer: research design. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:558–564
  25. Maclure M. The case–crossover design: a method for studying transient effects on the risk of acute events. Am J Epidemiol. 1991;133:144–153
  26. Greenland S. Confounding and exposure trends in case–crossover and case–time–control designs. Epidemiology. 1996;7:231–239
  27. Suissa S. The case–time–control design. Epidemiology. 1995;6:248–253
  28. Suissa S. The case–time–control design: further assumptions and conditions. Epidemiology. 1998;9:441–445
  29. Cochran WG. The effectiveness of adjustment by subclassification in removing bias in observational studies. Biometrics. 1968;24:295–313
  30. Rubin DB. Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scores. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:757–763
  31. Cook EF, Goldman L. Asymmetric stratification: an outline for an efficient method for controlling confounding in cohort studies. Am J Epidemiol. 1988;127:626–639
  32. Psaty BM, Koepsell TD, Lin D, Weiss NS, Siscovick DS, Rosendaal FR, et al. Assessment and control for confounding by indication in observational studies. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1999;47:749–754
  33. Peduzzi P, Concato J, Feinstein AR, Holford TR. Importance of events per independent variable in proportional hazards regression analysis. II. Accuracy and precision of regression estimates. J Clin Epidemiol. 1995;48:1503–1510
  34. Peduzzi P, Concato J, Kemper E, Holford TR, Feinstein AR. A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:1373–1379
  35. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika. 1983;70:41–55
  36. D'Agostino RB. Tutorial in biostatistics: propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med. 1998;17:2265–2281
  37. Stenestrand U, Wallentin L. Early statin treatment following acute myocardial infarction and 1-year survival. JAMA. 2001;285:430–436
  38. Aronow HD, Topol EJ, Roe MT, Houghtaling PL, Wolski KE, Lincoff AM, et al. Effect of lipid-lowering therapy on early mortality after acute coronary syndromes: an observational study. Lancet. 2001;357:1063–1068
  39. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. Am Stat. 1985;39:33–38
  40. Ming K, Rosenbaum PR. Substantial gains in bias reduction from matching with a variable number of controls. Biometrics. 2000;56:118–124
  41. Drake C. Effects of misspecification of the propensity score on estimators of treatment effect. Biometrics. 1993;49:1231–1236
  42. Cepeda MS, Boston R, Farrar JT, Strom BL. Comparison of logistic regression versus propensity score when the number of events is low and there are multiple confounders. Am J Epidemiol. 2003;158:280–287
  43. Miettinen OS. Stratification by a multivariate confounder score. Am J Epidemiol. 1976;104:609–620
  44. Pike MC, Anderson J, Day N. Some insights into Miettinen's multivariate confounder score approach to case–control study analysis. Epidemiol Community Health. 1979;33:104–106
  45. Newhouse JP, McClellan M. Econometrics in outcomes research: the use of instrumental variables. Annu Rev Public Health. 1998;19:17–34
  46. Angrist JD, Imbens GW, Rubin DB. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. J Am Stat Assoc. 1996;91:444–455
  47. Permutt T, Hebel JR. Simultaneous-equation estimation in a clinical trial of the effect of smoking on birth weight. Biometrics. 1989;45:619–622
  48. McClellan M, McNeil BJ, Newhouse JP. Does more intensive treatment of acute myocardial infarction in the elderly reduce mortality? Analysis using instrumental variables. JAMA. 1994;272:859–866
  49. Angrist JD, Imbens GW. Two-stage least squares estimation of average causal effects in models with variable treatment intensity. J Am Stat Assoc. 1995;90:431–442
  50. Snow Jones A, Miller DJ, Salkever DS. Parental use of alcohol and children's behavioural health: a household production analysis. Health Econ. 1999;8:661–683
  51. Wen SW, Kramer MS. Uses of ecologic studies in the assessment of intended treatment effects. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:7–12
  52. Naylor CD. Ecological analysis of intended treatment effects: caveat emptor. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:1–5
  53. Johnston SC, Henneman T, McCulloch CE, van der Laan M. Modeling treatment effects on binary outcomes with grouped-treatment variables and individual covariates. Am J Epidemiol. 2002;156:753–760
  54. Horwitz RI, Viscoli CM, Clemens JD, Sadock RT. Developing improved observational methods for evaluating therapeutic effectiveness. Am J Med. 1990;89:630–638
  55. Hlatky MA, Califf RM, Harrell FE, Lee KL, Mark DB, Pryor DB. Comparison of predictions based on observational data with the results of randomized controlled clinical trials of coronary artery bypass surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1988;11:237–245
  56. Benson K, Hartz AJ. A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1878–1886
  57. Ioannidis JP, Haidich AB, Pappa M, Pantazis N, Kokori SI, Tektonidou MG, et al. Comparison of evidence of treatment effects in randomized and nonrandomized studies. JAMA. 2001;286:821–830
  58. Kunz R, Oxman AD. The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials. BMJ. 1998;317:1185–1190
  59. Cornfield J, Haenszel W, Hammond EC, Lilienfeld AM, Shimkin MB, Wynder EL. Smoking and lung cancer: recent evidence and a discussion of some questions. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1959;22:173–203
  60. Fisher RA. Lung cancer and cigarettes?. Nature. 1958;182:108
  61. Lin DY, Psaty BM, Kronmal RA. Assessing the sensitivity of regression results to unmeasured confounders in observational studies. Biometrics. 1998;54:948–963
  62. LeLorier J, Gregoire G, Benhaddad A, Lapierre J, Derderian F. Discrepancies between meta-analyses and subsequent large randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 1997;337:536–542
  63. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias: dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA. 1995;273:408–412

PII: S0895-4356(04)00163-5

doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.03.011

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 57, Issue 12 , Pages 1223-1231 , December 2004

Article Tools