Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
In this article, we review the history and key reasons for new-user comparisons in pharmacoepidemiology, highlighting the target trial framework as a unifying framework. We describe three distinct pharmacoepidemiological new-user study designs: (1) new-user versus non-user; (2) active comparator new-user; (i.e., ACNU) and (3) prevalent new-user (i.e., PNU) designs, and discuss how each relates to key issues of defining time zero, choosing appropriate comparator groups, and potential sources of bias they do and do not account for. We use a clinical example of hormone replacement therapy and the risk of coronary heart disease to illustrate practical considerations surrounding the application of the three designs presented.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11588434 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pds.70048 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!