Preference-based instrumental variables in health research rely on important and underreported assumptions: a systematic review

Link to article:

[DOI] [PDF]

Authors:

Widding-Havneraas, Tarhei, Arnstein Mykletun, Henrik Daae Zachrisson, Felix Elwert, Simen Markussen, Ashmita Chaulagain, Ingvild Lyhmann, David Mcdaid

Year:

2021

Reference:

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Summary

Objective Preference-based instrumental variables (PP IV) designs can identify causal effects when patients receive treatment due to variation in providers’ treatment preference. We offer a systematic review and methodological assessment of PP IV applications in health research. Study Design and Setting We included studies that applied PP IV for evaluation of any treatment in any population in health research (PROSPERO: CRD42020165014). We searched within four databases (Medline, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, SpringerLink) and four journals (including full-text and title and abstract sources) between January 1, 1998, and March 5, 2020. We extracted data on areas of applications and methodology, including assumptions using Swanson and Hernan's (2013) guideline. Results We included 185 of 1087 identified studies. The use of PP IV has increased, being predominantly used for treatment effects in cancer, cardiovascular disease, and mental health. The most common PP IV was treatment variation at the facility-level, followed by physician- and regional-level. Only 12 percent of applications report the four main assumptions for PP IV. Selection on treatment may be a potential issue in 46 percent of studies. Conclusion The assumptions of PP IV are not sufficiently reported in existing work. PP IV-studies should use reporting guidelines.

Project: