Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

A comparison of different methods for handling measurements affected by medication use

View ORCID ProfileJungyeon Choi, View ORCID ProfileOlaf M. Dekkers, Saskia le Cessie
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.04.23.22273899
Jungyeon Choi
1Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Address: Albinusdreef 2, C7-P, 2333 ZA Leiden, the Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Jungyeon Choi
  • For correspondence: J.Choi@lumc.nl
Olaf M. Dekkers
2Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Department of Endocrinology and Metabolism, Leiden, University Medical Center, Address: Albinusdreef 2, C7-P, 2333 ZA Leiden, the Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Olaf M. Dekkers
Saskia le Cessie
3Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Department of Biomedical Data sciences, Leiden University, Medical Center, Address: Albinusdreef 2, C7-P, 2333 ZA Leiden, the Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Supplementary material
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

In epidemiological research it is common to encounter measurements affected by medication use, such as blood pressure lowered by antihypertensive drugs. When one is interested in the relation between the variables not affected by medication, ignoring medication use can cause bias. Several methods have been proposed, but the problem is often ignored or handled with generic methods, such as excluding individuals on medication or adjusting for medication use in the analysis. This study aimed to investigate methods for handling measurements affected by medication use when one is interested in the relation between the unaffected variables and to provide guidance for how to optimally handle the problem. We focused on linear regression and distinguish between the situation where the affected measurement is an exposure, confounder or outcome. In the Netherlands Epidemiology of Obesity study and in several simulated settings, we compared generic and more advanced methods, such as substituting or adding a fixed value to the treated values, regression calibration, censored normal regression, Heckman’s treatment model and multiple imputation methods. We found that often-used methods such as adjusting for medication use could result in substantial bias and that methods for handling medication use should be chosen cautiously.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This study did not receive any funding

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The medical ethical committee of the Leiden University Medical Center gave ethical approval for the NEO study. The use of the NEO study data was approved by the NEO study board.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • O.M.Dekkers{at}lumc.nl

  • S.le_Cessie{at}lumc.nl

  • Declarations of interest: none

Data Availability

The simulated data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. The Netherlands Epidemiology of Obesity (NEO) data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

Copyright 
The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.
Back to top
PreviousNext
Posted April 27, 2022.
Download PDF

Supplementary Material

Data/Code
Email

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
A comparison of different methods for handling measurements affected by medication use
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
(Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
A comparison of different methods for handling measurements affected by medication use
Jungyeon Choi, Olaf M. Dekkers, Saskia le Cessie
medRxiv 2022.04.23.22273899; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.04.23.22273899
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Citation Tools
A comparison of different methods for handling measurements affected by medication use
Jungyeon Choi, Olaf M. Dekkers, Saskia le Cessie
medRxiv 2022.04.23.22273899; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.04.23.22273899

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Subject Area

  • Epidemiology
Subject Areas
All Articles
  • Addiction Medicine (230)
  • Allergy and Immunology (507)
  • Anesthesia (111)
  • Cardiovascular Medicine (1264)
  • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (207)
  • Dermatology (148)
  • Emergency Medicine (283)
  • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (538)
  • Epidemiology (10056)
  • Forensic Medicine (5)
  • Gastroenterology (502)
  • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2486)
  • Geriatric Medicine (240)
  • Health Economics (482)
  • Health Informatics (1653)
  • Health Policy (757)
  • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (638)
  • Hematology (250)
  • HIV/AIDS (538)
  • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (11896)
  • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (627)
  • Medical Education (255)
  • Medical Ethics (75)
  • Nephrology (269)
  • Neurology (2304)
  • Nursing (140)
  • Nutrition (354)
  • Obstetrics and Gynecology (458)
  • Occupational and Environmental Health (537)
  • Oncology (1259)
  • Ophthalmology (377)
  • Orthopedics (134)
  • Otolaryngology (226)
  • Pain Medicine (158)
  • Palliative Medicine (50)
  • Pathology (326)
  • Pediatrics (737)
  • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (315)
  • Primary Care Research (282)
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2295)
  • Public and Global Health (4850)
  • Radiology and Imaging (846)
  • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (493)
  • Respiratory Medicine (657)
  • Rheumatology (289)
  • Sexual and Reproductive Health (241)
  • Sports Medicine (228)
  • Surgery (273)
  • Toxicology (44)
  • Transplantation (131)
  • Urology (100)