期刊
PHARMACOEPIDEMIOLOGY AND DRUG SAFETY
卷 25, 期 12, 页码 1343-1353出版社
WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pds.4076
关键词
probabilistic bias analysis; quantitative bias analysis; comparative effectiveness; pharmacoepidemiology
Purpose We systematically reviewed pharmacoepidemiologic and comparative effectiveness studies that use probabilistic bias analysis to quantify the effects of systematic error including confounding, misclassification, and selection bias on study results. Methods We found articles published between 2010 and October 2015 through a citation search using Web of Science and Google Scholar and a keyword search using PubMed and Scopus. Eligibility of studies was assessed by one reviewer. Three reviewers independently abstracted data from eligible studies. Results Fifteen studies used probabilistic bias analysis and were eligible for data abstraction-nine simulated an unmeasured confounder and six simulated misclassification. The majority of studies simulating an unmeasured confounder did not specify the range of plausible estimates for the bias parameters. Studies simulating misclassification were in general clearer when reporting the plausible distribution of bias parameters. Regardless of the bias simulated, the probability distributions assigned to bias parameters, number of simulated iterations, sensitivity analyses, and diagnostics were not discussed in the majority of studies. Conclusion Despite the prevalence and concern of bias in pharmacoepidemiologic and comparative effectiveness studies, probabilistic bias analysis to quantitatively model the effect of bias was not widely used. The quality of reporting and use of this technique varied and was often unclear. Further discussion and dissemination of the technique are warranted. Copyright (C) 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据