Abstract

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and clinical guidelines use evidence from pharmacoepidemiology studies to inform prescribing decisions and fill evidence gaps left by randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The long-term safety and infrequent adverse reactions are not well-understood when RCTs are short and involve few patients, as is the case for most systemic immunomodulating drugs in dermatology. A better understanding of the design and implementation of pharmacoepidemiology studies will help practitioners assess the accuracy of etiologic findings and use them with confidence in clinical practice. Conducting pharmacoepidemiology studies follows a structured approach, which we discuss in this article: (i) a design layer connects the research question with the appropriate study design, and considering which hypothetical RCT one ideally would want to conduct reduces inadvertent investigator errors; (ii) a measurement layer transforms longitudinal patient-level data into variables that identify the study population, patient characteristics, treatment, and outcomes; and (iii) the analysis focuses on the causal treatment effect estimation. The review and interpretation of pharmacoepidemiology studies should consider issues beyond a typical review of RCTs, chiefly the lack of baseline randomization and the use of secondary data. Well-designed and well-conducted pharmacoepidemiologic studies complement dermatology practice with critical information on prescribing systemic medications.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call