ArticleAmerican journal of epidemiology2026
Evaluation of potential approaches for counting person-time in instances where no active comparator is present.
Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Emulating the target trial framework in pharmacoepidemiology is challenging when there is no active comparator. We evaluate six approaches to finding surrogate index dates for untreated patients with the goal of identifying one or more solutions that indicate they would give potentially unbiased results. This numerical experiment used 73 070 patients from the MarketScan administrative databases (2013-2019) with type 2 diabetes, first-line therapy with metformin, and second-line therapy with either sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) or sulfonylureas. Patients taking sulfonylureas were converted into an experimental "untreated" arm. Part 1 sought to find surrogate index dates for the untreated arm. Part 2 compared the experimental estimates of the effect of SGLT2is on cardiovascular disease compared to sulfonylureas, using the surrogate index dates, to the reference estimate. The reference hazard ratio was 0.69. The hazard ratios after the respective approaches for selecting surrogate index dates are as follows: rejection sampling: 0.61, 0.63; median: 1.10, 1.15; prediction model: 0.96; matching algorithm: 1.07. Only the rejection sampling approaches for selecting a surrogate index date provided results which indicate low amounts of potential bias. Extreme care should be taken when making study design decisions for observational research questions that lack an active comparator group.
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.