Author
Listed:
- Yulong Jia
(Sichuan University
NMPA Key Laboratory for Real World Data Research and Evaluation in Hainan
Sichuan Center of Technology Innovation for Real World Data)
- Jing Wang
(Sichuan University
NMPA Key Laboratory for Real World Data Research and Evaluation in Hainan
Sichuan Center of Technology Innovation for Real World Data)
- Chunrong Liu
(Sichuan University
NMPA Key Laboratory for Real World Data Research and Evaluation in Hainan
Sichuan Center of Technology Innovation for Real World Data)
- Peng Zhao
(Sichuan University
NMPA Key Laboratory for Real World Data Research and Evaluation in Hainan
Sichuan Center of Technology Innovation for Real World Data)
- Yan Ren
(Sichuan University
NMPA Key Laboratory for Real World Data Research and Evaluation in Hainan
Sichuan Center of Technology Innovation for Real World Data)
- Yiquan Xiong
(Sichuan University
NMPA Key Laboratory for Real World Data Research and Evaluation in Hainan
Sichuan Center of Technology Innovation for Real World Data)
- GuoWei Li
(McMaster University)
- Meng Chen
(Ministry of Education
Sichuan University)
- Xin Sun
(Sichuan University
NMPA Key Laboratory for Real World Data Research and Evaluation in Hainan
Sichuan Center of Technology Innovation for Real World Data)
- Jing Tan
(Sichuan University
NMPA Key Laboratory for Real World Data Research and Evaluation in Hainan
Sichuan Center of Technology Innovation for Real World Data)
Abstract
Background and Objective An increasing number of observational studies have investigated the risk of using drugs during pregnancy on congenital malformations. However, the credibility of the causal relationships drawn from these studies remains uncertain. This study aims to evaluate the potential methodological issues in existing observational studies. Methods We used a stepwise approach to investigate this issue. First, we identified observational studies published in 2020 that examined the risk of congenital malformations associated with medication use during pregnancy. We assessed the methodological characteristics for establishing causality, including study design, confounding control, and sensitivity analysis, and compared them between “core clinical journals” and “general journals.” For studies reporting an increased risk of congenital malformations in core clinical journals, we searched for subsequent studies addressing the same research question published between January 2021 and May 2023 to assess the consistency of the literature. Results A total of 40 eligible studies were published in 2020, primarily focused on the safety of vitamin B12 and folic acid (n = 4), antidepressants (n = 4), and others (n = 32). Our findings suggest that only two (5.00%) studies used causal models to guide the identification of confounding, and only eight (20.00%) studies assessed the potential dose–response relationship. In all, 15 (37.50%) studies used propensity score analysis strategy to achieve “mimic-randomization.” In addition, 22 studies (55.00%) performed sensitivity analyses, while 10 (45.45%) showed inconsistency with the primary outcome. Furthermore, 5 studies reported positive outcomes, whereas only 1 out of 11 studies demonstrated a positive correlation between drug usage during pregnancy and major malformations in subsequent studies. Conclusion A significant portion of the studies has failed to sufficiently consider the essential methodological characteristics required to improve the credibility of causal inferences. The increased risk of congenital malformations documented in core clinical journal was not adequately replicated in subsequent studies.
Suggested Citation
Yulong Jia & Jing Wang & Chunrong Liu & Peng Zhao & Yan Ren & Yiquan Xiong & GuoWei Li & Meng Chen & Xin Sun & Jing Tan, 2024.
"The Methodological Quality of Observational Studies Examining the Risk of Pregnancy Drug Use on Congenital Malformations Needs Substantial Improvement: A Cross-Sectional Survey,"
Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 47(11), pages 1171-1188, November.
Handle:
RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:47:y:2024:i:11:d:10.1007_s40264-024-01465-x
DOI: 10.1007/s40264-024-01465-x
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:47:y:2024:i:11:d:10.1007_s40264-024-01465-x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.