Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29044735›Full record

ReviewPharmacoepidemiology and drug safety2018

Making fair comparisons in pregnancy medication safety studies: An overview of advanced methods for confounding control.

Mollie E Wood, Kate L Lapane, Marleen M H J van Gelder, Dheeraj Rai, Hedvig M E Nordeng

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  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

5 authors.

Mollie E WoodPharmacoEpidemiology and Drug Safety Research Group, School of Pharmacy, University of Oslo, Norway.ORCID 0000-0002-9302-2641
Kate L LapaneDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA.
Marleen M H J van GelderDepartment for Health Evidence, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Dheeraj RaiSchool of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, UK.
Hedvig M E NordengPharmacoEpidemiology and Drug Safety Research Group, School of Pharmacy, University of Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding the safety of medication use during pregnancy relies on observational studies: However, confounding in observational studies poses a threat to the validity of estimates obtained from observational data. Newer methods, such as marginal structural models and propensity calibration, have emerged to deal with complex confounding problems, but these methods have seen limited uptake in the pregnancy medication literature. In this article, we provide an overview of newer advanced methods for confounding control and show how these methods are relevant for pregnancy medication safety studies.

Indexed as

Confounding Factors, EpidemiologicObservational Studies as TopicData Interpretation, StatisticalDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse ReactionsFemaleFetal DevelopmentHumansMaternal ExposurePharmacovigilancePregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPrenatal Exposure Delayed EffectsResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID29044735
PMCPMC6646901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.