Literature DB >> 29341340

Bias from restricting to live births when estimating effects of prescription drug use on pregnancy complications: A simulation.

Elizabeth A Suarez1, Suzanne N Landi1, Mitchell M Conover1, Michele Jonsson Funk1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Administrative claim databases are increasingly being used to study the safety of medication exposures during pregnancy. These studies are restricted to live births due to a reliance on algorithms for estimating gestational age that are based on codes associated with live delivery. Conditioning on live birth may induce selection bias when studying the effect of a drug on a pregnancy complication if fetal death is a competing risk for the complication or is caused by the complication.
METHODS: We simulated a population of 100,000 pregnancies and estimated the impact of selection bias on relative estimates for the effect of antidepressant exposure on the outcome of preeclampsia. We assumed that the exposure, outcome, and covariates increased the risk of fetal loss.
RESULTS: A downward bias in the risk ratio was consistently observed when conditioning on live births. When an unmeasured covariate was assumed to be a common cause of fetal death, antidepressant use, and preeclampsia, the direction of bias varied depending on the strength of the confounding relationship coupled with the selection bias. Despite the very low prevalence of stillbirth, the strength of the relationship between antidepressant use and stillbirth had a substantial impact on bias.
CONCLUSIONS: Conditioning on live birth can be problematic when studying pregnancy complications. Simple quantitative selection bias analysis in populations restricted to live births may not fully account for selection bias.
Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  antidepressant agents; bias analysis; pharmacoepidemiology; preeclampsia; pregnancy; selection bias

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29341340     DOI: 10.1002/pds.4387

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf        ISSN: 1053-8569            Impact factor:   2.890


  6 in total

1.  Making the best use of data not created for research.

Authors:  Kristin Palmsten; Christina D Chambers
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2018-03-25       Impact factor: 3.980

2.  Adherence to Nordic dietary patterns and risk of first-trimester spontaneous abortion.

Authors:  Anne Sofie Dam Laursen; Benjamin Randeris Johannesen; Sydney K Willis; Elizabeth E Hatch; Lauren A Wise; Amelia K Wesselink; Kenneth J Rothman; Henrik Toft Sørensen; Ellen Margrethe Mikkelsen
Journal:  Eur J Nutr       Date:  2022-04-24       Impact factor: 4.865

3.  The curse of the perinatal epidemiologist: inferring causation amidst selection.

Authors:  Jonathan M Snowden; Marit L Bovbjerg; Mekhala Dissanayake; Olga Basso
Journal:  Curr Epidemiol Rep       Date:  2018-09-27

4.  Quantification of selection bias in studies of risk factors for birth defects among livebirths.

Authors:  Dominique Heinke; Janet W Rich-Edwards; Paige L Williams; Sonia Hernandez-Diaz; Marlene Anderka; Sarah C Fisher; Tania A Desrosiers; Gary M Shaw; Paul A Romitti; Mark A Canfield; Mahsa M Yazdy
Journal:  Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol       Date:  2020-04-06       Impact factor: 3.103

5.  Environmental hazards, social inequality, and fetal loss: Implications of live-birth bias for estimation of disparities in birth outcomes.

Authors:  Dana E Goin; Joan A Casey; Marianthi-Anna Kioumourtzoglou; Lara J Cushing; Rachel Morello-Frosch
Journal:  Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2021-02-26

Review 6.  Longitudinal Methods for Modeling Exposures in Pharmacoepidemiologic Studies in Pregnancy.

Authors:  Mollie E Wood; Angela Lupattelli; Kristin Palmsten; Gretchen Bandoli; Caroline Hurault-Delarue; Christine Damase-Michel; Christina D Chambers; Hedvig M E Nordeng; Marleen M H J van Gelder
Journal:  Epidemiol Rev       Date:  2022-01-14       Impact factor: 6.222

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.