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
. 2016 Oct 14;4(1):1234.
doi: 10.13063/2327-9214.1234. eCollection 2016.

Comparative Effectiveness Research Using Observational Data: Active Comparators to Emulate Target Trials with Inactive Comparators

Anders Huitfeldt  1 , Miguel A Hernan  2 , Mette Kalager  3 , James M Robins  1
Affiliations

Comparative Effectiveness Research Using Observational Data: Active Comparators to Emulate Target Trials with Inactive Comparators

Anders Huitfeldt et al. EGEMS (Wash DC). .

Abstract

Introduction: Because a comparison of noninitiators and initiators of treatment may be hopelessly confounded, guidelines for the conduct of observational research often recommend using an "active" comparator group consisting of people who initiate a treatment other than the medication of interest. In this paper, we discuss the conditions under which this approach is valid if the goal is to emulate a trial with an inactive comparator.

Identification of effects: We provide conditions under which a target trial in a subpopulation can be validly emulated from observational data, using an active comparator that is known or believed to be inactive for the outcome of interest. The average treatment effect in the population as a whole is not identified, but under certain conditions this approach can be used to emulate a trial in the subset of individuals who were treated with the treatment of interest, in the subset of individuals who were treated with the treatment of interest but not with the comparator, or in the subset of individuals who were treated with both the treatment of interest and the active comparator.

The plausibility of the comparability conditions: We discuss whether the required conditions can be expected to hold in pharmacoepidemiologic research, with a particular focus on whether the conditions are plausible in situations where the standard analysis fails due to unmeasured confounding by access to health care or health seeking behaviors.

Discussion: The conditions discussed in this paper may at best be approximately true. Investigators using active comparator designs to emulate trials with inactive comparators should exercise caution.

Keywords: Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER); Electronic Medical Record (EMR); Evidence Based Medicine; Methods.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Three Observational Contrasts and the Population Subgroup in Which the Effect Is Identified under Several Conditions Note: A is the treatment of interest, B is the active comparator.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lund JL, Richardson DB, Stürmer T. The Active Comparator, New User Study Design in Pharmacoepidemiology: Historical Foundations and Contemporary Application. Current Epidemiology Reports. 2015;2(4):221–228. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hernan MA, Alonso A, Logan R, et al. Observational studies analyzed like randomized experiments: an application to postmenopausal hormone therapy and coronary heart disease. Epidemiology. 2008;19(6):766–779. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Dreyer NA, Schneeweiss S, McNeil BJ, et al. GRACE principles: recognizing high-quality observational studies of comparative effectiveness. Am J Manag Care. 2010;16(6):467–471. - PubMed
    1. Setoguchi S, G T. Comparator selection. In: Velentgas PDN, Nourjah P, et al., editors. Developing a Protocol for Observational Comparative Effectiveness Research: A User’s Guide. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2013. pp. 59–70. Vol AHRQ Publication 12(13)-EHC099. - PubMed
    1. Gagne JJ, P J, Avorn J, Glynn RJ, Seeger JD. Standards for Causal Inference Methods in Analyses of Data from Observational and Experimental Studies in Patient-Centered Outcomes Research. Patient-Centered Outcome Research Institute Methodology Committee; 2012.

LinkOut - more resources