Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21163621›Full record

SynthesisJournal of clinical epidemiology2011

Use of instrumental variable in prescription drug research with observational data: a systematic review.

Yong Chen, Becky A Briesacher

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 34 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
34citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

34 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Association between exenatide use and incidence of Alzheimer's disease.Alzheimer's & dementia (New York, N. Y.) · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Yong ChenUniversity of Massachusetts Medical School, and Meyers Primary Care Institute, Worcester, MA 01605, USA. yong.chen@umassmed.edu
Becky A Briesacher

Funding

Cost-related Underuse of Medications and the Health of Older AdultsK01AG031836 · NIA · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI BRIESACHER, BECKY A · 2008 to 2012
$679k
NIA NIH HHS K01 AG031836NIA NIH HHS K01AG031836
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveInstrumental variable (IV) analysis may offer a useful approach to the problem of unmeasured confounding in prescription drug research if the IV is: (1) strongly and unbiasedly associated to treatment assignment; and (2) uncorrelated with factors predicting the outcome (key assumptions). STUDY DESIGN AND

methodsWe conducted a systematic review of the use of IV methods in prescription drug research to identify the major types of IVs and the evidence for meeting IV assumptions. We searched MEDLINE, OVID, PsychoInfo, EconLit, and economic databases from 1961 to 2009.

resultsWe identified 26 studies. Most (n=16) were published after 2007. We identified five types of IVs: regional variation (n=8), facility-prescribing patterns (n=5), physician preference (n=8), patient history/financial status (n=3), and calendar time (n=4). Evidence supporting the validity of IV was inconsistent. All studies addressed the first IV assumption; however, there was no standard for demonstrating that the IV sufficiently predicted treatment assignment. For the second assumption, 23 studies provided explicit argument that IV was uncorrelated with the outcome, and 16 supported argument with empirical evidence.

conclusionsUse of IV methods is increasing in prescription drug research. However, we did not find evidence of a dominant IV. Future research should develop standards for reporting the validity and strength of IV according to key assumptions.

Indexed as

Comparative Effectiveness ResearchConfounding Factors, EpidemiologicEvidence-Based MedicineHumansModels, StatisticalPrescription DrugsUnited StatesPrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID21163621
PMCPMC3079803

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.