SynthesisPharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2016
Probabilistic bias analysis in pharmacoepidemiology and comparative effectiveness research: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
21 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Availability of secondary healthcare data for conducting pharmacoepidemiology studies in Mexico: a systematic review.Journal of comparative effectiveness research · 2026Pooled it
- Use of sensitivity analyses to assess uncontrolled confounding from unmeasured variables in observational, active comparator pharmacoepidemiologic studies: a systematic review.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Pooled it
- Quantitative bias analysis in practice: review of software for regression with unmeasured confounding.BMC medical research methodology · 2023Pooled it
- Trial
- Exposure to Systemic Antimicrobials During Pregnancy and Risk of Miscarriage: A Population-Based Registry Study.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Article
- Quantifying selection bias due to unobserved patients in pharmacoepidemiologic studies of severe COVID-19 cohorts.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Quantitative bias analysis for mismeasured variables in health research: a review of software tools.BMC medical research methodology · 2025Review
- Prenatal exposure to psychotropics and analgesics on cognitive, linguistic and educational outcomes - a scoping review with focus on validity and reliability of outcome measures.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Parameterization of Beta Distributions for Bias Parameters of Binary Exposure Misclassification in Probabilistic Bias Analysis.Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Using Quantitative Bias Analysis to Adjust for Misclassification of COVID-19 Outcomes: An Applied Example of Inhaled Corticosteroids and COVID-19 Outcomes.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2025Article
- Neighborhood disadvantage and adolescent behavior problems: how do inferences differ across definitions of disadvantage?Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology · 2024Article
- Development and Validation of a Claims-Based Model to Predict Categories of Obesity.American journal of epidemiology · 2024Article
- Simultaneous adjustment of uncontrolled confounding, selection bias and misclassification in multiple-bias modelling.International journal of epidemiology · 2023Article
- The FLURESP European commission project: cost-effectiveness assessment of ten public health measures against influenza in Italy: is there an interest in COVID-19 pandemic?Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2023Article
- Diabetes update: What's new, what's interesting.Journal of diabetes · 2022Article
- Data Quality in Electronic Health Record Research: An Approach for Validation and Quantitative Bias Analysis for Imperfectly Ascertained Health Outcomes Via Diagnostic Codes.Harvard data science review · 2022Article
- Bias Analysis Gone Bad.American journal of epidemiology · 2021Article
- A primer on quantitative bias analysis with positive predictive values in research using electronic health data.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019Review
- The replication crisis in epidemiology: snowball, snow job, or winter solstice?Current epidemiology reports · 2018Article
- Bias from outcome misclassification in immunization schedule safety research.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeWe systematically reviewed pharmacoepidemiologic and comparative effectiveness studies that use probabilistic bias analysis to quantify the effects of systematic error including confounding, misclassification, and selection bias on study results.
methodsWe found articles published between 2010 and October 2015 through a citation search using Web of Science and Google Scholar and a keyword search using PubMed and Scopus. Eligibility of studies was assessed by one reviewer. Three reviewers independently abstracted data from eligible studies.
resultsFifteen studies used probabilistic bias analysis and were eligible for data abstraction-nine simulated an unmeasured confounder and six simulated misclassification. The majority of studies simulating an unmeasured confounder did not specify the range of plausible estimates for the bias parameters. Studies simulating misclassification were in general clearer when reporting the plausible distribution of bias parameters. Regardless of the bias simulated, the probability distributions assigned to bias parameters, number of simulated iterations, sensitivity analyses, and diagnostics were not discussed in the majority of studies.
conclusionDespite the prevalence and concern of bias in pharmacoepidemiologic and comparative effectiveness studies, probabilistic bias analysis to quantitatively model the effect of bias was not widely used. The quality of reporting and use of this technique varied and was often unclear. Further discussion and dissemination of the technique are warranted. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.