Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42087349›Full record

ArticlePharmacology research & perspectives2026

Methods Applied to Assess Real-World Effectiveness of Drugs: A Scoping Review.

Benedikte Irene von Osmanski, Janne Petersen, Charlotte Thor Petersen, Andreas Høiberg Bentsen, Espen Jimenez-Solem, Mikkel Zöllner Ankarfeldt

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Benedikte Irene von OsmanskiCopenhagen Phase IV Unit, Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Center for Clinical Research and Prevention, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9026-5958
Janne PetersenCopenhagen Phase IV Unit, Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Center for Clinical Research and Prevention, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Charlotte Thor PetersenSignum Life Science, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Andreas Høiberg BentsenSignum Life Science, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Espen Jimenez-SolemCopenhagen Phase IV Unit, Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Center for Clinical Research and Prevention, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mikkel Zöllner AnkarfeldtCopenhagen Phase IV Unit, Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Center for Clinical Research and Prevention, Copenhagen University Hospital Bispebjerg and Frederiksberg, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7954-9255

Funding

Innovationsfonden
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Drug effectiveness evaluations are needed to bridge the gap between premarketing trials and clinical practice, but the specific methods used in such evaluations remain unclear. Therefore, this review aimed to identify pharmacoepidemiological effectiveness studies based on real-world data (RWD) and categorize them based on the methods applied and the drugs and outcomes investigated. We searched PubMed and Embase for relevant records published in the period July-December 2019. Eligible studies: (i) were RWD-based; (ii) evaluated one or multiple drug exposures, and (iii) included at least one effectiveness outcome (as primary outcome). Among 4820 identified records, 1129 passed title-abstract screening, 200 were randomly selected for full-text assessment, and 87 were ultimately included. Of these, 55 included > 1000 patients, 22 included > 10 000 patients, and 22 explicitly restricted to new users. Chemotherapy was the most common exposure (n = 32), all-cause mortality the most prevalent outcome (n = 52), and non-use of the exposure drug (n = 42) the most frequent comparator category. Survival models (n = 55) were the dominating statistical models, and 13 studies used only descriptive statistics. In conclusion, well-known pharmacoepidemiological methods were applied in the included studies, and many had large study populations. Common limitations were use of simple descriptive statistics and absence of active comparators.

Indexed as

PharmacoepidemiologyHumansModels, Statisticaldrug effectivenessmethodological researchpharmacoepidemiologyreal‐world datareal‐world evidence

Identifiers

PMID42087349
PMCPMC13143864

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.