Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29200891›Full record

ArticleClinical epidemiology2017

Conditioning on future exposure to define study cohorts can induce bias: the case of low-dose acetylsalicylic acid and risk of major bleeding.

Jennifer L Lund, Erzsébet Horváth-Puhó, Szimonetta Komjáthiné Szépligeti, Henrik Toft Sørensen, Lars Pedersen, Vera Ehrenstein, Til Stürmer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical epidemiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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, 54 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Clinical and economic benefits of seasonal COVID-19 vaccination in Germany: results from the ROUTINE-COV19 Study, September 2022 to March 2024.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Potential bias in observational PCSK9 inhibitor study.European heart journal. Cardiovascular pharmacotherapy · 2025
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. 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

7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Jennifer L LundDepartment of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Erzsébet Horváth-PuhóDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Szimonetta Komjáthiné SzépligetiDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Henrik Toft SørensenDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Lars PedersenDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Vera EhrensteinDepartment of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark.
Til StürmerDepartment of Epidemiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA.
Aarhus University · DKUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

North Carolina Translational & Clinical Sciences Institute (NC TraCS)UL1TR001111 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BUSE, JOHN BERNARD, CAREY, TIMOTHY S · 2013 to 2017
$43.9M
UNC Oncology K12K12CA120780 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI WILLIAM Y. KIM · 2007 to 2026
$9.6M
Propensity Scores and Preventive Drug Use in the ElderlyR01AG023178 · NIA · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI STURMER, TIL · 2005 to 2014
$2.7M
Methods for Estimating Sex Differences in Safety and Effectiveness of DrugsR01HL118255 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI JONSSON FUNK, MICHELE LAURA · 2014 to 2017
$1.7M
PROMIS Validation in Prospective Population-based Prostate Cancer Research StudyR01CA174453 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI CHEN, RONALD, REEVE, BRYCE B · 2012 to 2016
$1.4M
Patterns of use, comparative effectiveness, and safety of rotavirus vaccinesR21HD080214 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BROOKHART, MAURICE ALAN · 2014 to 2015
$413k
Propensity scores and preventive drug use in the elderlyR56AG023178 · NIA · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI STURMER, TIL · 2015 to 2015
$412k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001111NCI NIH HHS K12 CA120780NCI NIH HHS R01 CA174453NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL118255NIA NIH HHS R01 AG023178NIA NIH HHS R56 AG023178NICHD NIH HHS R21 HD080214
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA principle of cohort studies is that cohort membership is defined by current rather than future exposure information. Pharmacoepidemiologic studies using existing databases are vulnerable to violation of this principle. We evaluated the impact of using data on future redemption of prescriptions to determine cohort membership, motivated by a published example seeking to emulate a "per-protocol" association between continuous versus never use of low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and major bleeding (e.g., cerebral hemorrhage or gastrointestinal bleeding). MATERIALS AND

methodsDanish medical registry data from 2004 to 2011 were used to construct two analytic cohorts. In Cohort 1, we used information about future redemption of low-dose ASA prescriptions to identify cohorts of continuous and never-ASA users. In Cohort 2, we identified ASA initiators and non-initiators using only contemporaneous data and censored follow-up for changes in use over time. We implemented propensity score-matched Poisson regression to evaluate associations between ASA use and major bleeding and estimated adjusted incidence rate differences (IRDs) per 1,000 person-years and ratios (IRRs) overall and stratified by time since initiation.

resultsAmong >6 million eligible Danish adults, we identified 403,693 low-dose ASA initiators (Cohort 2), of whom 189,150 were defined as continuous users (Cohort 1). Overall, IRDs and IRRs were similar across cohorts. However, the IRD for major bleeding in the first 90 days was substantially larger in Cohort 1 (IRD=25 per 1,000 person-years) compared with Cohort 2 (IRD=10 per 1,000 person-years).

conclusionUsing future medication redemption data to define baseline cohorts violates basic epidemiologic principles. Compared with an approach using only contemporaneous data to define cohorts, the approach based on future redemption data generated a substantially higher short-term association between low-dose ASA use and major bleeding on the absolute, but not the relative, scale possibly due to selection and immortal time biases.

Indexed as

cohort studiesimmortal time biaspharmacoepidemiologyselection bias

Identifiers

PMID29200891
PMCPMC5703173
OpenAlexW2768134151

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.