A methodological survey of the analysis, reporting and interpretation of Absolute Risk ReductiOn in systematic revieWs (ARROW): a study protocol
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Pablo Alonso-Coello (1) (2)
Alonso Carrasco-Labra (2) (3)
Romina Brignardello-Petersen (2) (3)
Ignacio Neumann (2) (4)
Elie A Akl (2) (5) (6)
Xin Sun (2) (7)
Bradley C Johnston (2) (8) (9)
Matthias Briel (10)
Jason W Busse (11) (2)
Demián Glujovsky (12)
Carlos E Granados (13)
Alfonso Iorio (2)
Affan Irfan (14)
Laura M García (1)
Reem A Mustafa (15)
Anggie Ramirez-Morera (16)
Iván Solà (1)
Kari A O Tikkinen (17) (2)
Shanil Ebrahim (11) (18) (2)
Per O Vandvik (19)
Yuqing Zhang (2)
Anna Selva (1)
Andrea J Sanabria (1)
Oscar E Zazueta (1)
Robin W M Vernooij (1)
Holger J Schünemann (2)
Gordon H Guyatt (2) - 关键词：Systematic reviews ; Meta ; analysis ; Statistical data ; Evidence ; based medicine ; Numbers needed to treat ; Data reporting ; Absolute effect measures
- 刊名：Systematic Reviews
- 出版年：2013
- 出版时间：December 2013
- 年：2013
- 卷：2
- 期：1
- 全文大小：219 KB
- 参考文献：1. Laine C, Taichman DB, Mulrow C: Trustworthy clinical guidelines. / Ann Intern Med 2011,154(11):774-75. CrossRef
2. Barratt A, Wyer PC, Hatala R, McGinn T, Dans AL, Keitz S, Moyer V, For GG, Evidence-Based Medicine Teaching Tips Working Group: Tips for learners of evidence-based medicine: 1. Relative risk reduction, absolute risk reduction and number needed to treat. / CMAJ 2004,171(4):353-58. CrossRef
3. Akl EA, Oxman AD, Herrin J, Vist GE, Terrenato I, Sperati F, Costiniuk C, Blank D, Schünemann H: Using alternative statistical formats for presenting risks and risk reductions. / Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011., 3: CD006776
4. Nexoe J, Gyrd-Hansen D, Kragstrup J, Kristiansen IS, Nielsen JB: Danish GPs-perception of disease risk and benefit of prevention. / Fam Pract 2002, 19:3-. CrossRef
5. McGettigan P, Sly K, O’Connell D, Hill S, Henry D: The effects of information framing on the practices of physicians. / J Gen Intern Med 1999,14(10):633-42. CrossRef
6. Hux JE, Naylor CD: Communicating the benefits of chronic preventive therapy: does the format of efficacy data determine patients-acceptance of treatment? / Med Decis Making 1995,15(2):152-57. CrossRef
7. Schmid CH, Lau J, McIntosh MW, Cappelleri JC: An empirical study of the effect of the control rate as a predictor of treatment efficacy in meta-analysis of clinical trials. / Stat Med 1998, 17:1923-942. CrossRef
8. Deeks JJ, Higgins JPT, Altman DG: Chapter 9: analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses. In / Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. Edited by: Higgins JPT, Green S. London: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.
9. Smeeth L, Haines A, Ebrahim S: Numbers needed to treat derived from meta-analyses sometimes informative, usually misleading. / BMJ 1999, 318:1548-551. CrossRef
10. Malenka DJ, Baron JA, Johansen S, Wahrenberger JW, Ross JM: The framing effect of relative and absolute risk. / J Gen Intern Med 1993, 8:543-48. CrossRef
11. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, Schünemann HJ, GRADE Working Group: GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. / BMJ 2008,336(7650):924-26. CrossRef
12. Guyatt G, Oxman AD, Akl EA, Kunz R, Vist G, Brozek J, Norris S, Falck-Ytter Y, Glasziou P, DeBeer H, Jaeschke R, Rind D, Meerpohl J, Dahm P, Schünemann HJ: GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. / J Clin Epidemiol 2011,64(4):383-94. CrossRef
13. Higgins JPT, Green S: / Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0. Edited by: Higgins JPT, Green S. London: The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.
14. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Dvorin EL, Welch HG: Ratio measures in leading medical journals: structured review of accessibility of underlying absolute risks. / BMJ 2006, 333:1248-252. CrossRef
15. King NB, Harper S, Young ME: Use of relative and absolute effect measures in reporting health inequalities: structured review. / BMJ 2012,3(345):e5774. CrossRef
16. Sedrakyan A, Shih C: Improving depiction of benefits and harms: analyses of studies of well-known therapeutics and review of high-impact medical journals. / Med Care 2007, 45:523-28. CrossRef
17. Beller EM, Glasziou PP, Hopewell S, Altman DG: Reporting of effect direction and size in abstracts of systematic reviews. / JAMA 2011,306(18):1981-982. CrossRef
18. Gigerenzer G, Wegwarth O, Feufel M: Misleading communication of risk. / BMJ 2010, 341:c4830. CrossRef
19. Akl EA, Briel M, You JJ, Lamontagne F, Gangji A, Cukierman-Yaffe T, Alshurafa M, Sun X, Nerenberg KA, Johnston BC, Vera C, Mills EJ, Bassler D, Salazar A, Bhatnagar N, Busse JW, Khalid Z, Walter S, Cook DJ, Schünemann HJ, Altman DG, Guyatt GH: LOST to follow-up Information in Trials (LOST-IT): a protocol on the potential impact. / Trials 2009, 10:40. CrossRef
20. Briel M, Lane M, Montori VM, Bassler D, Glasziou P, Malaga G, Akl EA, Ferreira-Gonzalez I, Alonso-Coello P, Urrutia G, Kunz R, Culebro CR, da Silva SA, Flynn DN, Elamin MB, Strahm B, Murad MH, Djulbegovic B, Adhikari NK, Mills EJ, Gwadry-Sridhar F, Kirpalani H, Soares HP, Abu Elnour NO, You JJ, Karanicolas PJ, Bucher HC, Lampropulos JF, Nordmann AJ, Burns KE, / et al.: Stopping randomized trials early for benefit: a protocol of the Study Of Trial Policy Of Interim Truncation-2 (STOPIT-2). / Trials 2009, 10:49. CrossRef
21. Sun X, Briel M, Busse JW, Akl EA, You JJ, Mejza F, Bala M, Diaz-Granados N, Bassler D, Mertz D, Srinathan SK, Vandvik PO, Malaga G, Alshurafa M, Dahm P, Alonso-Coello P, Heels-Ansdell DM, Bhatnagar N, Johnston BC, Wang L, Walter SD, Altman DG, Guyatt GH: Subgroup analysis of trials is rarely easy (SATIRE): a study protocol for a systematic review to characterize the analysis, reporting, and claim of subgroup effects in randomized trials. / Trials 2009, 10:101. CrossRef
22. Kasenda B, von Elm EB, You J, Blümle A, Tomonaga Y, Saccilotto R, Amstutz A, Bengough T, Meerpohl J, Stegert M, Tikkinen KA, Neumann I, Carrasco-Labra A, Faulhaber M, Mulla S, Mertz D, Akl EA, Bassler D, Busse JW, Ferreira-González I, Lamontagne F, Nordmann A, Rosenthal R, Schandelmaier S, Sun X, Vandvik PO, Johnston BC, Walter MA, Burnand B, Schwenkglenks M, / et al.: Learning from failure - rationale and design for a study about discontinuation of randomized trials (DISCO study). / BMC Med Res Methodol 2012, 12:131. CrossRef
23. Shea BJ, Hamel C, Wells GA, Bouter LM, Kristjansson E, Grimshaw J, Henry DA, Boers M: AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. / J Clin Epidemiol 2009,62(10):1013-020. CrossRef
24. Landis JR, Koch GG: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. / Biometrics 1977, 33:159-74. CrossRef
25. Bassler D, Briel M, Montori VM, Lane M, Glasziou P, Zhou Q, Heels-Ansdell D, Walter SD, Guyatt GH: STOPIT-2 Study Group. Stopping randomized trials early for benefit and estimation of treatment effects: systematic review and meta-regression analysis. / JAMA 2010,303(12):1180-187. CrossRef
26. Sun X, Briel M, Busse JW, You JJ, Akl EA, Mejza F, Bala MM, Bassler D, Mertz D, Diaz-Granados N, Vandvik PO, Malaga G, Srinathan SK, Dahm P, Johnston BC, Alonso-Coello P, Hassouneh B, Walter SD, Heels-Ansdell D, Bhatnagar N, Altman DG, Guyatt GH: Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: systematic review. / BMJ 2012, 344:e1553. CrossRef
27. Akl EA, Briel M, You JJ, Sun X, Johnston BC, Busse JW, Mulla S, Lamontagne F, Bassler D, Vera C, Alshurafa M, Katsios CM, Zhou Q, Cukierman-Yaffe T, Gangji A, Mills EJ, Walter SD, Cook DJ, Schünemann HJ, Altman DG, Guyatt GH: Potential impact on estimated treatment effects of information lost to follow-up in randomised controlled trials (LOST-IT): systematic review. / BMJ 2012, 344:e2809. CrossRef
28. Carling CLL, Kristoffersen DT, Montori VM, Herrin J, Schünemann HJ, Treweek S, Akl EA, Oxman AD: The effect of alternative summary statistics for communicating risk reduction on decisions about taking statins: a randomized trial. / PLoS Med 2009,6(8):e1000134. CrossRef
29. Woloshin S, Shawrtz LM: Communicating data about the benefits and harms of treatment. / Ann Intern Med 2011, 155:87-6. CrossRef - 作者单位：Pablo Alonso-Coello (1) (2)
Alonso Carrasco-Labra (2) (3)
Romina Brignardello-Petersen (2) (3)
Ignacio Neumann (2) (4)
Elie A Akl (2) (5) (6)
Xin Sun (2) (7)
Bradley C Johnston (2) (8) (9)
Matthias Briel (10)
Jason W Busse (11) (2)
Demián Glujovsky (12)
Carlos E Granados (13)
Alfonso Iorio (2)
Affan Irfan (14)
Laura M García (1)
Reem A Mustafa (15)
Anggie Ramirez-Morera (16)
Iván Solà (1)
Kari A O Tikkinen (17) (2)
Shanil Ebrahim (11) (18) (2)
Per O Vandvik (19)
Yuqing Zhang (2)
Anna Selva (1)
Andrea J Sanabria (1)
Oscar E Zazueta (1)
Robin W M Vernooij (1)
Holger J Schünemann (2)
Gordon H Guyatt (2)
1. Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Institute of Biomedical Research (IIB-Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain
2. Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
3. Evidence-Based Dentistry Unit, Faculty of Dentistry, Universidad de Chile, Santiago, Chile
4. Department of Medicine, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago, Chile
5. Department of Internal Medicine, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon
6. Department of Medicine, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, USA
7. Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Centre, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
8. Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Medicine, The Hospital for Sick Children, Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
9. Child Health Evaluative Sciences, The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
10. Basel Institute for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
11. Department of Anaesthesia, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
12. Argentine Cochrane Centre IECS (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy), Buenos Aires, Argentina
13. área de investigaciones, Facultad de Medicina, Universidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia
14. Internal Medicine Residency Program, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, USA
15. Department of Medicine and Nephrology, University Of Missouri-Kansas City, Missouri-Kansas City, Missouri, USA
16. CCSS Permanent Medical Advisor, Health Care Development Division, IHCAI Foundation & Central America Cochrane, Costa Rica, kragujevac, Costa Rica
17. Department of Urology, Helsinki University Central Hospital and University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
18. Institute of Health Policy, Management & Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
19. Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services, Oslo, Norway - ISSN：2046-4053
文摘
Background Clinicians, providers and guideline panels use absolute effects to weigh the advantages and downsides of treatment alternatives. Relative measures have the potential to mislead readers. However, little is known about the reporting of absolute measures in systematic reviews. The objectives of our study are to determine the proportion of systematic reviews that report absolute measures of effect for the most important outcomes, and ascertain how they are analyzed, reported and interpreted. Methods/design We will conduct a methodological survey of systematic reviews published in 2010. We will conduct a 1:1 stratified random sampling of Cochrane vs. non-Cochrane systematic reviews. We will calculate the proportion of systematic reviews reporting at least one absolute estimate of effect for the most patient-important outcome for the comparison of interest. We will conduct multivariable logistic regression analyses with the reporting of an absolute estimate of effect as the dependent variable and pre-specified study characteristics as the independent variables. For systematic reviews reporting an absolute estimate of effect, we will document the methods used for the analysis, reporting and interpretation of the absolute estimate. Discussion Our methodological survey will inform current practices regarding reporting of absolute estimates in systematic reviews. Our findings may influence recommendations on reporting, conduct and interpretation of absolute estimates. Our results are likely to be of interest to systematic review authors, funding agencies, clinicians, guideline developers and journal editors.