SynthesisAddiction (Abingdon, England)2015
Potential bias due to outcome-related loss to follow-up in cohort studies on incidence of drug injection: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Characteristics of attrition within the SuperMIX cohort of people who inject drugs: a multiple event discrete-time survival analysis.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Informing evidence-based medicine for opioid use disorder using pharmacoeconomic studies.Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research · 2024Review
- The Ontario Integrated Supervised Injection Services Cohort Study of People Who Inject Drugs in Toronto, Canada (OiSIS-Toronto): Cohort Profile.Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine · 2021Article
- Continued Transmission of HIV Among Young Adults Who Inject Drugs in San Francisco: Still Room for Improvement.AIDS and behavior · 2018Article
- Dropout in clinical trials of pharmacological treatment for methamphetamine dependence: the role of initial abstinence.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2017Article
- Reducing bias in prospective observational studies of drug users: the need for upstream and downstream approaches.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to synthesize results from cohort studies on initiation into drug injection among vulnerable populations, to quantify heterogeneity in the estimated incidence rates of drug injection and to identify potential sources of heterogeneity and bias.
methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and LILACS were searched for relevant studies published between 1980 and 2012. Investigators independently reviewed studies for inclusion, retrieved information on baseline population characteristics and follow-up features and assessed study quality. Study-specific incidence rates of drug injection were calculated as the number of new injectors divided by the person-years at risk. The I(2) statistic was used to quantify heterogeneity in incidence rates across studies, and random-effects meta-regression models were used to identify determinants of heterogeneity and bias.
resultsNine cohorts totalling 1843 participants met the inclusion criteria, with individual sample sizes of 70-415 participants and follow-up lengths of 6 months-3.4 years. The incidence of drug injection varied widely, from 2.1 to 24.2 cases per 100 person-years. The strong between-study heterogeneity (I(2) = 90%, P<0.001) was reduced significantly after accounting for the different follow-up lengths (I(2) = 17%, P = 0.30), with a 57% (95% confidence interval 46-66%) decrease in the pooled incidence of drug injection per 1-year increase in average follow-up.
conclusionsThe incidence of drug injection decreases sharply with increasing follow-up length in cohort studies on drug injection initiation. Low retention rates and potential for downward selection bias in cohort studies on drug injection initiation are caused primarily by greater loss to follow-up among individuals at higher risk of starting injection, compared with other participants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25845977What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.