The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0466-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
This article corresponds to a literature review and analyze how heterogeneity of treatment (HTE) is reported and addressed in cohort studies and to evaluate the use of the different measures to HTE analysis.
prospective cohort studies, in English language, measuring the effect of a treatment (pharmacological, interventional, or other) published among 119 core clinical journals (defined by the National Library of Medicine) in the last 16 years were selected in the following data source: Medline. One reviewer randomly sampled journal articles with 1: 1 stratification by journal type: high impact journals (the New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, LANCET, Annals of Internal Medicine, BMJ and Plos Medicine) and low impact journal (the remaining journals) to identify 150 eligible studies. Two reviewers independently and in duplicate used standardized piloted forms to screen study reports for eligibility and to extract data. They also used explicit criteria to determine whether a cohort study reported HTE analysis. Logistic regression was used to examine the association of prespecified study characteristics with reporting versus not reporting of heterogeneity of treatment effect.
One hundred fifty cohort studies were included of which 88 (58%) reported HTE analysis. High impact journals (Odds Ratio: 3.5, 95% CI: 1.78–7.5; P < 0.001), pharmacological studies (Odds Ratio: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.13–0.51; P < 0.001) and studies published after 2014 (Odds Ratio: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.25–0.97; P = 0.004) were associated with more frequent reporting of HTE. 27 (31%) studies which reported HTE used an interaction test.
More than half cohort studies report some measure of heterogeneity of treatment effect. Prospective cohort studies published in high impact journals, with large sample size, or studying a pharmacological treatment are associated with more frequent HTE reporting. The source of funding was not associated with HTE reporting. There is a need for guidelines on how to perform HTE analyses in cohort studies.
Chapman PB, et al. Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation. N Engl J Med. 2011;
Guyatt G, Wyer PC, Ioannidis J. When to believe a subgroup analysis. In: Guyatt G, editor. User’s guide to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based clinical practice; 2008. p. 571–83.
Sun X, co. Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: systematic review. BMJ. 2012;344:e1553. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e1553.
Kyriacou DN, Lewis RJ. Confounding by indication in clinical research. JAMA. 2016 Nov 1;316(17):1818–9.
Varadhan R, et al. A framework for the analysis of heterogeneity of treatment effect in patient-centered outcomes research. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(8):818–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j/jclinepi.2013.02.009.
Annals of Internal Medicine. http://annals.org/
The BMJ: leading general medical journal. Research. http://www.bmj.com/
The JAMA Network | Home of JAMA and the Specialty Journals of the American Medical Association. http://jama.jamanetwork.com/journal.aspx
The Lancet journal. http://www.thelancet.com/
The New England Journal of Medicine: Research & Review Articles. http://www.nejm.org/k
PLOS Medicine: A Peer-Reviewed Open-Access Journal. http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/
Liberati A, co. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):e1–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.006.
Varadhan R. Johns Hopkins. In: Chapter 3. Estimation and reporting of heterogeneity of treatment effects. Developing an observational CER protocol: a user’s guide.
Burke JF, et al. Three simple rules to ensure reasonably credible subgroup analyses. BMJ. 2015;351:h5651. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h5651.
Rassen JA, et al. Applying propensity scores estimated in a full cohort to adjust for confounding in subgroup analyses. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2012;21(7):697–709. https://doi.org/10.1002/pds.2256. Epub 2011 Dec 8
National Library of Medicine. Abridged index medicus (aim or “core clinical”) journal titles. 2015. www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/aim.html.
Sox HC, Helfand M, Grimshaw J, Dickersin K. PLoS medicine editors, Tovey D, Knottnerus JA, Tugwell P. Comparative effectiveness research: challenges for medical journals. Am J Manag Care. 2010;16(5):e131–3. PubMed
Rubin DB. For objective causal inference, design trumps analysis. Ann Appl Stat. 2008;2(3):808–40. CrossRef
GA Wells, B Shea, D O'Connell, J Peterson, V Welch, M Losos, P Tugwell. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.asp.
- Reporting of heterogeneity of treatment effect in cohort studies: a review of the literature
David J. Biau
- BioMed Central
Neu im Fachgebiet AINS
Meistgelesene Bücher aus dem Fachgebiet AINS
Mail Icon II