ArticleEClinicalMedicine2021
The influence of selection bias on identifying an association between allergy medication use and SARS-CoV-2 infection.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantifying selection bias due to unobserved patients in pharmacoepidemiologic studies of severe COVID-19 cohorts.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Article
- Twenty-Five Years of Evolution and Hurdles in Electronic Health Records and Interoperability in Medical Research: Comprehensive Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Review
- Application of information from external data to correct for collider bias in a Covid-19 hospitalised cohort.BMC medical research methodology · 2024Article
- Comparing mental and physical health of U.S. veterans by VA healthcare use: implications for generalizability of research in the VA electronic health records.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Multimodal biomedical AI.Nature medicine · 2022Review
- COVID-19 outcomes in patients with cancer: Findings from the University of California health system database.Cancer medicine · 2022Article
- Update on Functional Inhibitors of Acid Sphingomyelinase (FIASMAs) in SARS-CoV-2 Infection.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedications to prevent and treat SARS-CoV-2 infection are needed to complement emerging vaccinations. Recent in vitro and electronic health record (EHR) studies suggested that certain allergy medications could prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection. We sought to carefully examine the potential selection bias associated with utilizing EHRs in these settings.
methodsWe analyzed associations of three allergy medications (cetirizine, diphenhydramine or hydroxyzine) with testing negative for SARS-CoV-2, measuring the potential effect of selection bias on these associations. We used a retrospective cohort of EHR data from 230,376 patients (18 years+) who visited outpatient clinicians in a single, large academic center at least once but were never hospitalized (10/1/2019-6/1/2020). Main exposures included EHR documentation of three allergy medications and allergy, with an intermediate outcome of receipt of a SARS-CoV-2 test, and the primary outcome as testing negative.
findingsSARS-CoV-2 testing rates varied by sex, age, race/ethnicity and insurance. Increasing age and public insurance were associated with a higher adjusted odds of test negativity, while being Black or Hispanic was significantly associated with test positivity. Allergy diagnosis and use of any of three allergy medications were each associated with a higher likelihood of receiving a test (e.g. diphenhydramine - Odds Ratio (OR) 2.99, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 2.73, 3.28; cetirizine 1.75 (95% CI 1.60, 1.92)). Among those tested, only use of diphenhydramine was associated with a negative SARS-CoV-2 test (adjusted OR = 2.23, 95% CI 1.10, 4.55). However, analyses revealed that selection bias may be responsible for the apparent protective effect of diphenhydramine.
interpretationDiphenhydramine use was associated with more SARS-CoV-2 testing and subsequent higher odds for negative tests. While EHR-based observational studies can inform a need for interventional trials, this study revealed limitations of EHR data. The finding that diphenhydramine documentation conferred a higher odds of testing negative for SARS-CoV-2 must be interpreted with caution due to probable selection bias.
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.