Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2006 May;17(3):268-75.
doi: 10.1097/01.ede.0000193606.58671.c5.

Evaluating short-term drug effects using a physician-specific prescribing preference as an instrumental variable

Affiliations

Evaluating short-term drug effects using a physician-specific prescribing preference as an instrumental variable

M Alan Brookhart et al. Epidemiology. 2006 May.

Abstract

Background: Postmarketing observational studies of the safety and effectiveness of prescription medications are critically important but fraught with methodological problems. The data sources available for such research often lack information on indications and other important confounders for the drug exposure under study. Instrumental variable methods have been proposed as a potential approach to control confounding by indication in nonexperimental studies of treatment effects; however, good instruments are hard to find.

Methods: We propose an instrument for use in pharmacoepidemiology that is based on a time-varying estimate of the prescribing physician's preference for one drug relative to a competing therapy. The use of this instrument is illustrated in a study comparing the effect of exposure to COX-2 inhibitors with nonselective, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory medications on gastrointestinal complications.

Results: Using conventional multivariable regression adjusting for 17 potential confounders, we found no protective effect due to COX-2 use within 120 days from the initial exposure (risk difference = -0.06 per 100 patients; 95% confidence interval = -0.26 to 0.14). However, the proposed instrumental variable method attributed a protective effect to COX-2 exposure (-1.31 per 100 patients; -2.42 to -0.20) compatible with randomized trial results (-0.65 per 100 patients; -1.08 to -0.22).

Conclusions: The instrumental variable method that we have proposed appears to have substantially reduced the bias due to unobserved confounding. However, more work needs to be done to understand the sensitivity of this approach to possible violations of the instrumental variable assumptions.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Diagram of the Causal Relations Motivating the Instrumental Variable Analysis

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Avorn J. Powerful medicines: the benefits, risks, and costs of prescription drugs. New York: Knopf; 2004.
    1. Jick H. The discovery of drug-induced illness. N Engl J Med. 1977;296:481–5. - PubMed
    1. The Centers for Education and Research on Therapeutics (CERTs) Risk Assessment Workshop Participants: Risk assessment of drugs, biologics and therapeutic devices: present and future issues. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2003;12:653–662. - PubMed
    1. Schneeweiss S, Avorn J. A review of uses of health care utilization databases for epidemiologic research on therapeutics. J Clin Epidemiol. 2005 in press. - PubMed
    1. Walker AM. Confounding by indication. Epidemiology. 1996;7:335–336. - PubMed

Substances