Evidence of Misclassification of Drug–Event Associations Classified as Gold Standard ‘Negative Controls’ by the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP)

Manfred Hauben (), Jeffrey K. Aronson and Robin E. Ferner
Additional contact information
Manfred Hauben: New York University School of Medicine
Jeffrey K. Aronson: University of Oxford
Robin E. Ferner: City Hospital

Drug Safety, 2016, vol. 39, issue 5, No 6, 432 pages

Abstract: Abstract Introduction Pharmacovigilance includes analysis of large databases of information on drugs and events using algorithms that detect disproportional frequencies of associations. In order to test such algorithms, attempts have been made to provide canonical reference lists of so-called ‘positive controls’ and ‘negative controls’. Reference sets with even modest levels of misclassification may result in under- or overstatement of the performance of algorithms. Aim We sought to determine the extent to which ‘negative control’ drug–event pairs in the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) database are misclassified Methods We searched the medical literature for evidence of associations between drugs and events listed by OMOP as negative controls. Results The criteria used in OMOP to classify positive and negative controls are asymmetric; drug–event associations published only as case series or case reports are classified as positive controls if they are cited in Drug-Induced Diseases by Tisdale and Miller, but as negative controls if case series or case reports exist but are not cited in Tisdale and Miller. Of 233 drug–event pairs classified in the 2013 version of OMOP as negative controls, 21 failed to meet pre-specified OMOP adjudication criteria; in another 19 cases we found case reports, case series, or observational evidence that the drug and event are associated. Overall, OMOP misclassified, or may have misclassified, 40 (17 %) of all ‘negative controls.’ Conclusions Results from studies of the performance of signal-detection algorithms based on the OMOP gold standard should be viewed with circumspection, because imperfect gold standards may lead to under/overstatement of absolute and relative signal detection algorithm performance. Improvements to OMOP would include omitting misclassified drug–event pairs, assigning more specific event labels, and using more extensive sources of information.

Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-016-0392-2 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:39:y:2016:i:5:d:10.1007_s40264-016-0392-2

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/adis/journal/40264

DOI: 10.1007/s40264-016-0392-2

Access Statistics for this article

Drug Safety is currently edited by Nitin Joshi

More articles in Drug Safety from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().