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
. 2021 Jul;27(7):949-957.
doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2021.03.003. Epub 2021 Apr 1.

Methodological evaluation of bias in observational coronavirus disease 2019 studies on drug effectiveness

Affiliations

Methodological evaluation of bias in observational coronavirus disease 2019 studies on drug effectiveness

Oksana Martinuka et al. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2021 Jul.

Abstract

Background and objective: Observational studies may provide valuable evidence on real-world causal effects of drug effectiveness in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). As patients are usually observed from hospital admission to discharge and drug initiation starts during hospitalization, advanced statistical methods are needed to account for time-dependent drug exposure, confounding and competing events. Our objective is to evaluate the observational studies on the three common methodological pitfalls in time-to-event analyses: immortal time bias, confounding bias and competing risk bias.

Methods: We performed a systematic literature search on 23 October 2020, in the PubMed database to identify observational cohort studies that evaluated drug effectiveness in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. We included articles published in four journals: British Medical Journal, New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association and The Lancet as well as their sub-journals.

Results: Overall, out of 255 articles screened, 11 observational cohort studies on treatment effectiveness with drug exposure-outcome associations were evaluated. All studies were susceptible to one or more types of bias in the primary study analysis. Eight studies had a time-dependent treatment. However, the hazard ratios were not adjusted for immortal time in the primary analysis. Even though confounders presented at baseline have been addressed in nine studies, time-varying confounding caused by time-varying treatment exposure and clinical variables was less recognized. Only one out of 11 studies addressed competing event bias by extending follow-up beyond patient discharge.

Conclusions: In the observational cohort studies on drug effectiveness for treatment of COVID-19 published in four high-impact journals, the methodological biases were concerningly common. Appropriate statistical tools are essential to avoid misleading conclusions and to obtain a better understanding of potential treatment effects.

Keywords: Competing risk bias; Confounding bias; Coronavirus disease 2019; Drug effectiveness; Immortal time bias.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the identified studies in the systematic literature review.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The summary of biases for the included studies.

Comment in

References

    1. Radford M.J., Foody J.M. How do observational studies expand the evidence base for therapy? JAMA. 2001;286:1228–1230. - PubMed
    1. Gilmartin-Thomas J.F., Liew D., Hopper I. Observational studies and their utility for practice. Aust Prescr. 2018;41:82–85. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Prada-Ramallal G., Takkouche B., Figueiras A. Bias in pharmacoepidemiologic studies using secondary health care databases: a scoping review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019;19:53. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sharma M., Nazareth I., Petersen I. Observational studies of treatment effectiveness: worthwhile or worthless? Clin Epidemiol. 2019;11:35–42. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Suissa S., Dell'Aniello S. Time-related biases in pharmacoepidemiology. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2020;29:1101–1110. - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources