311 research outputs found

    Selection of confounding variables should not be based on observed associations with exposure

    Get PDF
    In observational studies, selection of confounding variables for adjustment is often based on observed baseline incomparability. The aim of this study was to evaluate this selection strategy. We used clinical data on the effects of inhaled long-acting beta-agonist (LABA) use on the risk of mortality among patients with obstructive pulmonary disease to illustrate the impact of selection of confounding variables for adjustment based on baseline comparisons. Among 2,394 asthma and COPD patients included in the analyses, the LABA ever-users were considerably older than never-users, but cardiovascular co-morbidity was equally prevalent (19.9% vs. 19.9%). Adjustment for cardiovascular co-morbidity status did not affect the crude risk ratio (RR) for mortality: crude RR 1.19 (95% CI 0.93–1.51) versus RR 1.19 (95% CI 0.94–1.50) after adjustment for cardiovascular co-morbidity. However, after adjustment for age (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.76–1.19), additional adjustment for cardiovascular co-morbidity status did affect the association between LABA use and mortality (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.80–1.26). Confounding variables should not be discarded based on balanced distributions among exposure groups, because residual confounding due to the omission of confounding variables from the adjustment model can be relevant

    Instrumental variable meta-analysis of individual patient data: application to adjust for treatment non-compliance

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Intention-to-treat (ITT) is the standard data analysis method which includes all patients regardless of receiving treatment. Although the aim of ITT analysis is to prevent bias due to prognostic dissimilarity, it is also a counter-intuitive type of analysis as it counts patients who did not receive treatment, and may lead to "bias toward the null." As treated (AT) method analyzes patients according to the treatment actually received rather than intended, but is affected by the selection bias. Both ITT and AT analyses can produce biased estimates of treatment effect, so instrumental variable (IV) analysis has been proposed as a technique to control for bias when using AT data. Our objective is to correct for bias in non-experimental data from previously published individual patient data meta-analysis by applying IV methods</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Center prescribing preference was used as an IV to assess the effects of methotrexate (MTX) in preventing debilitating complications of chronic graft-versus-host-disease (cGVHD) in patients who received peripheral blood stem cell (PBSCT) or bone marrow transplant (BMT) in nine randomized controlled trials (1107 patients). IV methods are applied using 2-stage logistic, 2-stage probit and generalized method of moments models.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>ITT analysis showed a statistically significant detrimental effect with the use of day 11 MTX, resulting in cGVHD odds ratio (OR) of 1.34 (95% CI 1.02-1.76). AT results showed no difference in the odds of cGVHD with the use of MTX [OR 1.31 (95%CI 0.99-1.73)]. IV analysis further corrected the results toward no difference in the odds of cGVHD between PBSCT vs. BMT, allowing for a possibility of beneficial effects of MTX in preventing cGVHD in PBSCT recipients (OR 1.14; 95%CI 0.83-1.56).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>All instrumental variable models produce similar results. IV estimates correct for bias and do not exclude the possibility that MTX may be beneficial, contradicting the ITT analysis.</p

    Benefits of ICU admission in critically ill patients: Whether instrumental variable methods or propensity scores should be used

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The assessment of the causal effect of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) admission generally involves usual observational designs and thus requires controlling for confounding variables. Instrumental variable analysis is an econometric technique that allows causal inferences of the effectiveness of some treatments during situations to be made when a randomized trial has not been or cannot be conducted. This technique relies on the existence of one variable or "instrument" that is supposed to achieve similar observations with a different treatment for "arbitrary" reasons, thus inducing substantial variation in the treatment decision with no direct effect on the outcome. The objective of the study was to assess the benefit in terms of hospital mortality of ICU admission in a cohort of patients proposed for ICU admission (ELDICUS cohort).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Using this cohort of 8,201 patients triaged for ICU (including 6,752 (82.3%) patients admitted), the benefit of ICU admission was evaluated using 3 different approaches: instrumental variables, standard regression and propensity score matched analyses. We further evaluated the results obtained using different instrumental variable methods that have been proposed for dichotomous outcomes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The physician's main specialization was found to be the best instrument. All instrumental variable models adequately reduced baseline imbalances, but failed to show a significant effect of ICU admission on hospital mortality, with confidence intervals far higher than those obtained in standard or propensity-based analyses.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Instrumental variable methods offer an appealing alternative to handle the selection bias related to nonrandomized designs, especially when the presence of significant unmeasured confounding is suspected. Applied to the ELDICUS database, this analysis failed to show any significant beneficial effect of ICU admission on hospital mortality. This result could be due to the lack of statistical power of these methods.</p

    A self-controlled case series to assess the effectiveness of beta blockers for heart failure in reducing hospitalisations in the elderly

    Get PDF
    Background: To determine the suitability of using the self-controlled case series design to assess improvements in health outcomes using the effectiveness of beta blockers for heart failure in reducing hospitalisations as the example. Methods: The Australian Government Department of Veterans' Affairs administrative claims database was used to undertake a self-controlled case-series in elderly patients aged 65 years or over to compare the risk of a heart failure hospitalisation during periods of being exposed and unexposed to a beta blocker. Two studies, the first using a one year period and the second using a four year period were undertaken to determine if the estimates varied due to changes in severity of heart failure over time. Results: In the one year period, 3,450 patients and in the four year period, 12, 682 patients had at least one hospitalisation for heart failure. The one year period showed a non-significant decrease in hospitalisations for heart failure 4-8 months after starting beta-blockers, (RR, 0.76; 95% CI (0.57-1.02)) and a significant decrease in the 8-12 months post-initiation of a beta blocker for heart failure (RR, 0.62; 95% CI (0.39, 0.99)). For the four year study there was an increased risk of hospitalisation less than eight months post-initiation and significant but smaller decrease in the 8-12 month window (RR, 0.90; 95% CI (0.82, 0.98)). Conclusions: The results of the one year observation period are similar to those observed in randomised clinical trials indicating that the self-controlled case-series method can be successfully applied to assess health outcomes. However, the result appears sensitive to the study periods used and further research to understand the appropriate applications of this method in pharmacoepidemiology is still required. The results also illustrate the benefits of extending beta blocker utilisation to the older age group of heart failure patients in which their use is common but the evidence is sparse.Emmae N Ramsay, Elizabeth E Roughead, Ben Ewald, Nicole L Pratt and Philip Rya
    corecore