Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27031037›Full record

ArticleEpidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.)2016

Targeted Maximum Likelihood Estimation for Pharmacoepidemiologic Research.

Menglan Pang, Tibor Schuster, Kristian B Filion, Maria Eberg, Robert W Platt

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Machine learning in causal inference for epidemiology.European journal of epidemiology · 2024
    Article
  8. Association of Premorbid GLP-1RA and SGLT-2i Prescription Alone and in Combination with COVID-19 Severity.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2024
    Article
  9. Implementing TMLE in the presence of a continuous outcome.Research methods in medicine & health sciences · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

5 authors.

Menglan PangFrom the aCentre For Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Research Institute, Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; bDepartment of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, cDepartment of Pediatrics, dDivision of Clinical Epidemiology, Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada; and eThe Research Institute of the McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Tibor Schuster
Kristian B Filion
Maria Eberg
Robert W Platt

Funding

CIHR DSE-111845
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTargeted maximum likelihood estimation has been proposed for estimating marginal causal effects, and is robust to misspecification of either the treatment or outcome model. However, due perhaps to its novelty, targeted maximum likelihood estimation has not been widely used in pharmacoepidemiology. The objective of this study was to demonstrate targeted maximum likelihood estimation in a pharmacoepidemiological study with a high-dimensional covariate space, to incorporate the use of high-dimensional propensity scores into this method, and to compare the results to those of inverse probability weighting.

methodsWe implemented the targeted maximum likelihood estimation procedure in a single-point exposure study of the use of statins and the 1-year risk of all-cause mortality postmyocardial infarction using data from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink. A range of known potential confounders were considered, and empirical covariates were selected using the high-dimensional propensity scores algorithm. We estimated odds ratios using targeted maximum likelihood estimation and inverse probability weighting with a variety of covariate selection strategies.

resultsThrough a real example, we demonstrated the double robustness of targeted maximum likelihood estimation. We showed that results with this method and inverse probability weighting differed when a large number of covariates were included in the treatment model.

conclusionsTargeted maximum likelihood can be used in high-dimensional covariate settings. In high-dimensional covariate settings, differences in results between targeted maximum likelihood and inverse probability weighted estimation are likely due to sensitivity to (near) positivity violations. Further investigations are needed to gain better understanding of the advantages and limitations of this method in pharmacoepidemiological studies.

Indexed as

MortalityAdolescentAdultAgedCause of DeathCohort StudiesDatabases, FactualFemaleHumansHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase InhibitorsLikelihood FunctionsMaleMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionPharmacoepidemiologyRetrospective StudiesHydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID27031037
PMCPMC4890840

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.