Commentary: We still need observational studies of drugs—they just need to be better
Open Access
- 1 October 2006
- journal article
- editorial
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in International Journal of Epidemiology
- Vol. 35 (5) , 1310-1311
- https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyl134
Abstract
The paper by de Vries and colleagues examined different observational study designs used to assess the effects of statin use and demonstrates three key points. First, the need for accurate matching on key prognostic variables—in this case age. Second, the need to consider the underlying biology when designing epidemiological studies. Third, they suggest that a case–control study nested within a selected group of people may be more prone to bias than a population-based study. However there may be a bigger issue: both the observational designs found a substantial protective effect, while robust data from randomized trials suggests there is no effect. Does this mean we should do away with observational studies of drugs?Keywords
This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- An Assessment of the Publicly Disseminated Evidence of Safety Used in Decisions to Withdraw Medicinal Products from the UK and US MarketsDrug Safety, 2006
- Tutorial in biostatistics: the self‐controlled case series methodStatistics in Medicine, 2005
- Exposure to Tricyclic and Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor Antidepressants and the Risk of Hip FractureAmerican Journal of Epidemiology, 2003
- Short and long term mortality associated with foodborne bacterial gastrointestinal infections: registry based study * Commentary: matched cohorts can be usefulBMJ, 2003
- Use of selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors or tricyclic antidepressants and risk of hip fractures in elderly peopleThe Lancet, 1998
- Channeling bias in the interpretation of drug effectsStatistics in Medicine, 1991