Nørgaard Mette, Ehrenstein Vera, Vandenbroucke Jan P
Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark.
Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark; Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands; Department of Epidemiology and Population Health, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Mar 28;9:185-193. doi: 10.2147/CLEP.S129879. eCollection 2017.
Population-based health care databases are a valuable tool for observational studies as they reflect daily medical practice for large and representative populations. A constant challenge in observational designs is, however, to rule out confounding, and the value of these databases for a given study question accordingly depends on completeness and validity of the information on confounding factors. In this article, we describe the types of potential confounding factors typically lacking in large health care databases and suggest strategies for confounding control when data on important confounders are unavailable. Using Danish health care databases as examples, we present the use of proxy measures for important confounders and the use of external adjustment. We also briefly discuss the potential value of active comparators, high-dimensional propensity scores, self-controlled designs, pseudorandomization, and the use of positive or negative controls.
基于人群的医疗保健数据库是观察性研究的宝贵工具,因为它们反映了大量具有代表性人群的日常医疗实践。然而,观察性设计中一个持续存在的挑战是排除混杂因素,因此这些数据库对于特定研究问题的价值取决于混杂因素信息的完整性和有效性。在本文中,我们描述了大型医疗保健数据库中通常缺乏的潜在混杂因素类型,并提出了在重要混杂因素数据不可用时控制混杂的策略。以丹麦医疗保健数据库为例,我们展示了对重要混杂因素使用替代指标以及进行外部调整的方法。我们还简要讨论了活性对照、高维倾向得分、自我对照设计、伪随机化以及使用阳性或阴性对照的潜在价值。