Impact of time-varying exposure on estimated effects in observational studies using routinely collected data: protocol for a cross-sectional study

Introduction Time-varying exposure is an important issue that should be addressed in longitudinal observational studies using routinely collected data (RCD) for drug treatment effects. How well investigators designed, analysed and reported time-varying exposure, and to what extent the divergence that can be observed between different methods used for handling time-varying exposure in these studies remains uncertain. We will conduct a cross-sectional study to comprehensively address this question. Methods and analysis We have developed a comprehensive search strategy to identify all studies exploring drug treatment effects including both effectiveness and safety that used RCD and were published in core journals between 2018 and 2020. We will collect information regarding general study characteristics, data source profile, methods for handling time-varying exposure, results and the interpretation of findings from each eligibility. Paired reviewers will screen and extract data, resolving disagreements through discussion. We will describe the characteristics of included studies, and summarise the method used for handling time-varying exposure in primary analysis and sensitivity analysis. We will also compare the divergence between different approaches for handling time-varying exposure using ratio of risk ratios. Ethics and dissemination No ethical approval is required because the data we will use do not include individual patient data. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications.

[1]  J. Meerpohl,et al.  Evaluating agreement between bodies of evidence from randomised controlled trials and cohort studies in nutrition research: meta-epidemiological study , 2021, BMJ.

[2]  R. Burge,et al.  Comparison of Two-Year Treatment Adherence, Persistence, Discontinuation, Re-initiation, and Switching Between Psoriasis Patients Treated with Ixekizumab or Secukinumab in Real-World Settings. , 2021, Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

[3]  M. Pencina,et al.  Competing Risks, Treatment Switching, and Informative Censoring. , 2021, JAMA cardiology.

[4]  P. Austin,et al.  Evaluation of the Risk of Stroke Without Anticoagulation Therapy in Men and Women With Atrial Fibrillation Aged 66 to 74 Years Without Other CHA2DS2-VASc Factors. , 2021, JAMA cardiology.

[5]  H. Leslie,et al.  Quality of clinical management of children diagnosed with malaria: A cross-sectional assessment in 9 sub-Saharan African countries between 2007–2018 , 2020, PLoS medicine.

[6]  R. Burge,et al.  Comparison of Real-World Treatment Patterns Among Psoriasis Patients Treated with Ixekizumab or Adalimumab , 2020, Patient preference and adherence.

[7]  Xu Zhou,et al.  The reporting of safety among drug systematic reviews was poor before the implementation of the PRISMA harms checklist. , 2019, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[8]  P. Clare,et al.  Causal models adjusting for time-varying confounding-a systematic review of the literature. , 2018, International journal of epidemiology.

[9]  Olaf Klungel,et al.  The reporting of studies conducted using observational routinely collected health data statement for pharmacoepidemiology (RECORD-PE) , 2018, British Medical Journal.

[10]  Jacqueline Corrigan-Curay,et al.  Real-World Evidence and Real-World Data for Evaluating Drug Safety and Effectiveness. , 2018, JAMA.

[11]  G. D. Dal Pan,et al.  Assessing Drug Safety in Children - The Role of Real-World Data. , 2018, The New England journal of medicine.

[12]  P. Stang,et al.  Methods for time‐varying exposure related problems in pharmacoepidemiology: An overview , 2017, Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety.

[13]  Lisa M. LaVange,et al.  Multidimensional Evidence Generation and FDA Regulatory Decision Making: Defining and Using "Real-World" Data. , 2017, JAMA.

[14]  S. Langan,et al.  The reporting of studies using routinely collected health data was often insufficient , 2016, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[15]  H. Sørensen,et al.  Metformin and other glucose-lowering drug initiation and rates of community-based antibiotic use and hospital-treated infections in patients with type 2 diabetes: a Danish nationwide population-based cohort study , 2016, BMJ Open.

[16]  M. Nørgaard,et al.  How can the research potential of the clinical quality databases be maximized? The Danish experience , 2016, Journal of internal medicine.

[17]  David Moher,et al.  The REporting of Studies Conducted Using Observational Routinely-Collected Health Data (RECORD) Statement: Methods for Arriving at Consensus and Developing Reporting Guidelines , 2015, PloS one.

[18]  D Kalra,et al.  Electronic health records: new opportunities for clinical research , 2013, Journal of internal medicine.

[19]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Randomized trials published in higher vs. lower impact journals differ in design, conduct, and analysis. , 2013, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[20]  Scott R. Smith,et al.  Developing a Protocol for Observational Comparative Effectiveness Research: A User's Guide , 2013 .

[21]  X. Basagaña,et al.  Differences Between Marginal Structural Models and Conventional Models in Their Exposure Effect Estimates: A Systematic Review , 2011, Epidemiology.

[22]  David Moher,et al.  An evidence-based practice guideline for the peer review of electronic search strategies. , 2009, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[23]  Samy Suissa,et al.  Immortal time bias in pharmaco-epidemiology. , 2008, American journal of epidemiology.

[24]  L. Napolitano,et al.  Surgical Clinics of North America , 2019, Surgical Clinics of North America.

[25]  Charles Kaye Friedberg,et al.  Progress in Cardiovascular Diseases , 1959 .