27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Using Big Data to Emulate a Target Trial When a Randomized Trial Is Not Available: Table 1.

      ,
      American Journal of Epidemiology
      Oxford University Press (OUP)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Ideally, questions about comparative effectiveness or safety would be answered using an appropriately designed and conducted randomized experiment. When we cannot conduct a randomized experiment, we analyze observational data. Causal inference from large observational databases (big data) can be viewed as an attempt to emulate a randomized experiment-the target experiment or target trial-that would answer the question of interest. When the goal is to guide decisions among several strategies, causal analyses of observational data need to be evaluated with respect to how well they emulate a particular target trial. We outline a framework for comparative effectiveness research using big data that makes the target trial explicit. This framework channels counterfactual theory for comparing the effects of sustained treatment strategies, organizes analytic approaches, provides a structured process for the criticism of observational studies, and helps avoid common methodologic pitfalls.

          Related collections

          Most cited references50

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized studies.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            A Structural Approach to Selection Bias

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              High-dimensional propensity score adjustment in studies of treatment effects using health care claims data.

              Adjusting for large numbers of covariates ascertained from patients' health care claims data may improve control of confounding, as these variables may collectively be proxies for unobserved factors. Here, we develop and test an algorithm that empirically identifies candidate covariates, prioritizes covariates, and integrates them into a propensity-score-based confounder adjustment model. We developed a multistep algorithm to implement high-dimensional proxy adjustment in claims data. Steps include (1) identifying data dimensions, eg, diagnoses, procedures, and medications; (2) empirically identifying candidate covariates; (3) assessing recurrence of codes; (4) prioritizing covariates; (5) selecting covariates for adjustment; (6) estimating the exposure propensity score; and (7) estimating an outcome model. This algorithm was tested in Medicare claims data, including a study on the effect of Cox-2 inhibitors on reduced gastric toxicity compared with nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). In a population of 49,653 new users of Cox-2 inhibitors or nonselective NSAIDs, a crude relative risk (RR) for upper GI toxicity (RR = 1.09 [95% confidence interval = 0.91-1.30]) was initially observed. Adjusting for 15 predefined covariates resulted in a possible gastroprotective effect (0.94 [0.78-1.12]). A gastroprotective effect became stronger when adjusting for an additional 500 algorithm-derived covariates (0.88 [0.73-1.06]). Results of a study on the effect of statin on reduced mortality were similar. Using the algorithm adjustment confirmed a null finding between influenza vaccination and hip fracture (1.02 [0.85-1.21]). In typical pharmacoepidemiologic studies, the proposed high-dimensional propensity score resulted in improved effect estimates compared with adjustment limited to predefined covariates, when benchmarked against results expected from randomized trials.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                American Journal of Epidemiology
                Am. J. Epidemiol.
                Oxford University Press (OUP)
                0002-9262
                1476-6256
                April 14 2016
                April 15 2016
                April 15 2016
                March 18 2016
                : 183
                : 8
                : 758-764
                Article
                10.1093/aje/kwv254
                4832051
                26994063
                37a6c385-77e9-449d-aaf4-aca20317dc9b
                © 2016
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article