Literature DB >> 18495427

Instantaneous preference was a stronger instrumental variable than 3- and 6-month prescribing preference for NSAIDs.

Sean Hennessy1, Charles E Leonard2, Cristin M Palumbo2, Xiaoli Shi2, Thomas R Ten Have2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Prescriber preference has been used as an instrumental variable (IV) in a prior study of nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) vs. selective cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) inhibitors, with preference expressed as the drug constituting the immediately preceding prescription by the same prescriber (instantaneous preference). We sought to compare the correlations between different IV measures with exposure. STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: In an ambulatory electronic medical record database of university-based physicians, we compared correlations with exposure among three measures of prescriber preference: instantaneous preference, and the proportion of that prescriber's prescriptions in the past 3 and 6 months that were for an NSAID.
RESULTS: We identified 37,934 initial NSAID/COX-2 prescriptions. The correlation with exposure was 0.283 (95% confidence interval 0.274-0.292) for instantaneous preference, 0.197 (0.187-0.206) for 3-month preference, and 0.170 (0.160-0.180) for 6-month preference.
CONCLUSION: Instantaneous NSAID/COX-2 prescribing preference was most strongly correlated, and therefore the strongest IV. Future research should focus on the robustness of IV methods to violations of underlying assumptions, extension of IV methods to more than two groups, ratio measures of association, second and subsequent prescriptions per person, and time-varying exposures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18495427      PMCID: PMC2605608          DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.01.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  6 in total

1.  Selecting on treatment: a pervasive form of bias in instrumental variable analyses.

Authors:  Sonja A Swanson; James M Robins; Matthew Miller; Miguel A Hernán
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-01-21       Impact factor: 4.897

Review 2.  Instrumental variable methods in comparative safety and effectiveness research.

Authors:  M Alan Brookhart; Jeremy A Rassen; Sebastian Schneeweiss
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.890

3.  Evaluating possible confounding by prescriber in comparative effectiveness research.

Authors:  Jessica M Franklin; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Krista F Huybrechts; Robert J Glynn
Journal:  Epidemiology       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.822

4.  Physicians' prescribing preferences were a potential instrument for patients' actual prescriptions of antidepressants.

Authors:  Neil M Davies; David Gunnell; Kyla H Thomas; Chris Metcalfe; Frank Windmeijer; Richard M Martin
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2013-09-24       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Early treatment with talk therapy or antidepressants in severely bereaved people and risk of suicidal behavior and psychiatric illness: an instrumental variable analysis.

Authors:  Morten Fenger-Grøn; Maiken Ina Siegismund Kjaersgaard; Erik Thorlund Parner; Mai-Britt Guldin; Peter Vedsted; Mogens Vestergaard
Journal:  Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2018-08-24       Impact factor: 4.790

Review 6.  A theoretical exploration of therapeutic monomania as a physician-based instrumental variable.

Authors:  Brian J Potter; Colin Dormuth; Jacques Le Lorier
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2019-05-15       Impact factor: 2.890

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.