Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38093083›Full record

ReviewDrug safety2024

Implementation of a Taxonomy-Based Framework for the Selection of Appropriate Drugs and Outcomes for Real-World Data Signal Detection Studies.

Astrid Coste, Angel Ys Wong, Charlotte Warren-Gash, Julian Matthewman, Andrew Bate, Ian J Douglas

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Drug safety, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Astrid CosteDepartment of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, WC1E 7HT, London, UK. astrid.coste@lshtm.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-4207-7447
Angel Ys WongDepartment of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, WC1E 7HT, London, UK.
Charlotte Warren-GashDepartment of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, WC1E 7HT, London, UK.
Julian MatthewmanDepartment of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, WC1E 7HT, London, UK.
Andrew BateDepartment of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, WC1E 7HT, London, UK.
Ian J DouglasDepartment of Non-Communicable Disease Epidemiology, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, Keppel St, WC1E 7HT, London, UK.
University of London · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionFor signal detection studies investigating either drug safety or method evaluation, the choice of drug-outcome pairs needs to be tailored to the planned study design and vice versa. While this is well understood in hypothesis-testing epidemiology, it should be as important in signal detection, but this has not widely been considered. There is a need for a taxonomy framework to provide guidance and a systematic reproducible approach to the selection of appropriate drugs and outcomes for signal detection studies either investigating drug safety or assessing method performance using real-world data.

objectiveThe aim was to design a general framework for the selection of appropriate drugs and outcomes for signal detection studies given a study design of interest. As a motivating example, we illustrate how the framework is applied to build a reference set for a study aiming to assess the performance of the self-controlled case series with active comparators.

methodsWe reviewed criteria presented in two published studies which aimed to provide practical advice for choosing the appropriate signal evaluation methodology, and assessed their relevance for signal detection. Further characteristics specific to signal detection were added. The final framework is based on: the application of study design requirements, the database(s) of interest, and the clinical importance of the drug(s) and outcome(s) under consideration. This structure was applied by selecting drug-outcome pairs as a reference set (i.e. list of drug-outcome pairs classified as positive or negative controls) for which the method is expected to work well for a signal detection study aiming to assess the performance of self-controlled case series. Eight criteria were used, related to the application of self-controlled case series assumptions, choice of active comparators, coverage in the database of interest and clinical importance of the outcomes.

resultsAfter application of the framework, two classes of antibiotics (seven drugs) were selected for the study, and 28 outcomes from all organ classes were chosen from the drug labels, out of the 273 investigated. In total, this corresponds to 104 positive controls (drug-outcome pairs) and 58 negative controls.

conclusionsWe proposed and applied a framework for the selection of drugs and outcomes for both drug safety signal detection and method assessment used in signal detection to optimise their performance given a study design. This framework will eliminate part of the bias relating to drugs and outcomes not being suited to the method or database. The main difficulty lies in the choice of the criteria and their application to ensure systematic selection, especially as some information remains unknown in signal detection, and clinical judgement was needed on occasions. The same framework could be adapted for other methods.

Indexed as

Pharmaceutical PreparationsResearch DesignPharmaceutical Preparations

Identifiers

PMID38093083
PMCPMC10821990
OpenAlexW4389669928

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.