Epidemiology is concerned with the distribution of disease and health in human populations. Drugs are one of the factors that influence such a distribution. Pharmacoepidemiology can be defined as the application of epidemiologic knowledge, methods, and reasoning to the study of the effects (beneficial and adverse) and uses of drugs in human populations.
Pharmacoepidemiology aims to describe, explain, control, and predict the effects and uses of pharmacologic treatment modalities in a defined time, space, and population. The present article is an introduction to the contributions of epidemiology to the study of drugs.
LawsonDH.Pharmacoepidemiology: a new discipline.Br Med J1984; 289: 940–1.
2.
ZitoJMCraigTJ.Pharmacoepidemiologic methods for identifying and quantifying the behavioral effects of neuropharmacological agents.Drug Intell Clin Pharm1987; 21: in press.
3.
EdlavitchSA.Postmarketing surveillance methodologies.Drug Intell Clin Pharm1987; 21: in press.
4.
StromBLMiettinenOSMelmonKL.Postmarketing studies of drug efficacy: why?Am J Med1985; 78: 475–80.
5.
SloneDShapiroSMiettinenOSFinkleWDStolleyPD.Drug evaluation after marketing.Ann Intern Med1979; 90: 257–61.
LasagnaLL.A plea for the “naturalistic” study of medicines.Eur J Clin Pharmacol1974; 7: 153–4.
8.
MiettinenOS.Efficacy of therapeutic practice: will epidemiology provide the answers? In: MelmonKL, ed. Drug therapeutics.Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1980: 201–8.
9.
JickHMiettinenOSShapiroSLewisGPSiskindVSloneD.Comprehensive drug surveillance.JAMA1970; 213: 1455–60.
10.
WardellWMTsiancoMCAnavekarSNDavisHT.Post-marketing surveillance of new drugs. I. Review of objectives and methodology; II. Case studies.J Clin Pharmacol1979; 19: 85–94, 169–84.
11.
StromBLMelmonKL.Can postmarketing surveillance help to effect optimal drug therapy?JAMA1979; 242: 2420–3.
12.
CastleWMNlCHOLLSJTDownieCC.Problems of postmarketing surveillance.Br J Clin Pharmacol1983; 16: 581–5.
13.
BellRLSmithEO.Clinical trials in post-marketing surveillance of drugs.Controlled Clin Trials1982; 3: 61–8.
14.
RossiACKnappDEAnelloCDiscovery of adverse drug reactions: a comparison of selected phase IV studies with spontaneous reporting methods.JAMA1983; 249: 2226–8.
15.
BordenEKGardnerJSWestlandMMGardnerSD.Post-marketing drug surveillance (letter).JAMA1984; 251: 729.
16.
SackettDLHaynesRBGentMTaylorDW.Compliance. In: InmanWHW, ed. Monitoring for drug safety.2nd ed.Lancaster, UK: MTP Press, 1986: 471–83.
PortaM.The relevance of the explanatory/pragmatic distinction for experimental and observational studies (abstract).Clin Res1986; 34: 831A.
19.
CharlsonMEHorwitzRI.Applying results of randomized trials to clinical practice: impact of losses before randomization.Br Med J1984; 259: 1281–4.
20.
LastJM, ed. A dictionary of epidemiology.New York: Oxford University Press, 1983: 88.
21.
Office of Technology Assessment.The impact of randomized clinical trials on health policy and medical practice: background paper.Washington, DC: U.S. Congress Printing Office, OTA-BP-H/22, 1983.
SackettDL.Bias in analytic research.J Chronic Dis1979; 32: 51–63.
25.
MiettinenOS.Efficacy of therapeutic practice: will epidemiology provide the answers? In: MelmonKL, ed. Drug therapeu-tics.Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1980: 201–8.
26.
MiettinenOS.The need for randomization in the study of intended effects.Stat Med1983; 2: 267–71.
27.
StromBLMiettinenOSMelmonKL.Postmarketing studies of drug efficacy: when must they be randomized?J Clin Pharmacol1983; 34: 1–7.
28.
StromBLMiettinenOSMelmonKL.Postmarketing studies of drug efficacy: how?Am J Med1984; 77: 703–8.
29.
ShusterJVan EysJ.Interaction between prognostic factors and treatment.Controlled Clin Trials1983; 4: 209–14.
30.
HorwitzRIMcfarlaneMJBrennanTAFeinsteinAR.The role of susceptibility bias in epidemiologic research.Arch Intern Med1985; 145: 909–12.
31.
CrooksJ.Drug epidemiology and clinical pharmacology: their contributions to patient care.Br J Clin Pharmacol1983; 16: 351–7.
32.
Colin-JonesDGLangmanMJSLawsonDHVesseyMP.Post-marketing surveillance of the safety of cimetidine: twelve-month morbidity report.Q J Med1985; 54: 253–68.
33.
Colin-JonesDGLangmanMJSLawsonDHVesseyMP.Post-marketing surveillance of the safety of cimetidine: twelve-month mortality report.Br Med J1983; 286: 1713–6.
34.
StolleyPD.The use of vital and morbidity statistics for the detection of adverse drug reactions and for monitoring of drug safety.J Clin Pharmacol1982; 22: 499–504.
35.
StolleyPD.Asthma mortality: why the United States was spared an epidemic of deaths due to asthma.Am Rev Respir Dis1972; 105: 883–90.
36.
EdlavitchSAFeinleibMAnelloc.A potential use of the national death index for postmarketing drug surveillance.JAMA1985; 253: 1292–5.
37.
JickHVesseyMP.Case control studies in the evaluation of drug induced illness.Am J Epidemiol1978; 107: 1–7.
38.
IbrahimMA, ed. The case-control study: consensus and controversy.New York: Pergamon Press, 1979.
39.
Royal College of General Practitioners.Oral contraceptives and health.London: Pitman, 1974.
40.
VesseyMDollRPetoRJohnsonBWigginsP.A long-term follow-up study of women using different methods of contraception—an interim report.J Biosoc Sci1976; 8: 373–427.
41.
BergmanUGrimssonAWahbaAHWWesterholmB, eds. Studies in drug utilization. Methods and applications. Copen-hagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe, 1979.
42.
SjoqvistFAgenasI, eds. Drug utilization studies: implications for medical care. Proceedings from ANIS Symposium, Sanga-Saby, Sweden, June 8–9, 1982. Acta Med Scand1984; 216(suppl 683): 127–34.
43.
LaporteJRPortaMCapellaD.Drug utilization studies: a tool for determining the effectiveness of drug use.Br J Clin Pharmacol1983; 16: 301–4.
44.
ColomboFShapiroSSlone'D. TognoniG, eds. Epidemiological evaluation of drugs.Amsterdam: Elsevier/North-Holland, 1977.
45.
TognoniGBellantuonoCLaderM, eds. Epidemiological impact of psychotropic drugs.Amsterdam: Elsevier/North-Holland, 1981.
46.
InmanWHW, ed. Monitoring for drug safety.Lancaster, UK: MTP Press, 1980.
47.
WalkerSRGoldbergA, eds. Monitoring for adverse drug reactions.Lancaster, UK: MTP Press, 1984.
48.
VenningGR.Identification of adverse reactions to new drugs.Br Med J1983; 286: 199–202, 289–92, 365–8, 458–60, 544–7.
49.
MatorenGM, ed. The clinical research process in the pharmaceutical industry.New York: Marcel Dekker, 1983.
50.
JonesJKVan De CarrSWRosaFMorseLLeroyA.Medicaid drug-event data: an emerging tool for evaluation of drug risk.Acta Med Scand1984; 216(suppl 683): 127–34.
51.
JickHMadsenSNudelmanPMPereraDRStergachisA.Postmarketing follow-up at Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound.Pharmacotherapy1984; 4(2):99–100.
52.
TilsonHH.Getting down to bases—record linkage in Saskatchewan (editorial).Can J Pub Health1985; 76: 222–3.
53.
RoosLLRoosNPCageorgeSMNicolJP.How good are the data? Reliability of one health care data bank.Med Care1982; 20: 266–76.
54.
RoosLLNicolJP.Building individual histories with registries. A case study.Med Care1983; 21: 955–69.
55.
FeinleibM.Data bases, data banks and data dredging: the agony and the ecstasy.J Chronic Dis1984; 37: 783–90.
56.
StrandLM.Drug epidemiology resources and studies: the Saskatchewan data base.Drug Inf J1985; 19: 253–6.
57.
MorseML.The COMPASS data base.Drug Inf J1985; 19: 249–52.
58.
JickH.Use of automated data bases to study drug effects after marketing.Pharmacotherapy1985; 5: 278–9.
59.
ByarDP.Why data bases should not replace randomized clinical trials.Biometrics1980; 36: 337–42.
60.
GreenSBByarDP.Using observational data from registries to compare treatments: the fallacy of omnimetrics.Stat Med1984; 3: 361–73.
61.
HulkaBS.Epidemiological applications to health services research.J Community Health1978; 4: 140–9.
