Pharmacoepidemiology for nephrologists (part 2): potential biases and how to overcome them

35Citations
Citations of this article
28Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fu, E. L., van Diepen, M., Xu, Y., Trevisan, M., Dekker, F. W., Zoccali, C., … Carrero, J. J. (2021). Pharmacoepidemiology for nephrologists (part 2): potential biases and how to overcome them. Clinical Kidney Journal, 14(5), 1317–1326. https://doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfaa242

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free