Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32381560›Full record

SynthesisAnnals of the rheumatic diseases2020

Improving rheumatoid arthritis comparative effectiveness research through causal inference principles: systematic review using a target trial emulation framework.

Sizheng Steven Zhao, Houchen Lyu, Daniel H Solomon, Kazuki Yoshida

Registry-linked trialAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Annals of the rheumatic diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07512401 (Safety of Reduced Methotrexate Lab Monitoring), which is not on this map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT07512401 completednot on this map

Safety of Reduced Methotrexate Lab Monitoring: a Population-based, Target Trial Emulation Study

TypeobservationalSponsorMayo ClinicRan2012 to 2025Enrolled2,414ConditionsRheumatic DiseasesArmsStandard methotrexate lab monitoring, Reduced methotrexate lab monitoring
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Cellular therapies for rheumatic disease.Current opinion in rheumatology · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sizheng Steven ZhaoMusculoskeletal Biology, Institute of Lifecourse and Medical Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK s.zhao8@liverpool.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-3558-7353
Houchen LyuDivision of Rheumatology, Inflammation, and Immunity, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0128-0062
Daniel H SolomonDivision of Rheumatology, Inflammation, and Immunity, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Kazuki YoshidaDivision of Rheumatology, Inflammation, and Immunity, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2030-3549

Funding

VERITY: Value and Evidence in Rheumatology using bioInformaTics, and advanced analYticsP30AR072577 · NIAMS · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI Daniel Hal Solomon · 2017 to 2026
$9.8M
NIAMS NIH HHS P30 AR072577
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTarget trial emulation is an intuitive design framework that encourages investigators to formulate their comparative effectiveness research (CER) question as a hypothetical randomised controlled trial (RCT). Our aim was to systematically review CER studies in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to provide examples of design limitations that could be avoided using target trial emulation, and how these limitations might introduce bias.

methodsWe searched for head-to-head CER studies of biologic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) in RA. Study designs were reviewed for seven components of the target trial emulation framework: eligibility criteria, treatment strategies, assignment procedures, follow-up period, outcome, causal contrasts of interest (ie, intention-to-treat (ITT) or per-protocol effect) and analysis plan. Hypothetical trials corresponding to the reported methods were assessed to identify design limitations that would have been avoided with an explicit target trial protocol. Analysis of the primary

resultsWe found 31 CER studies, of which 29 (94%) had at least one design limitation belonging to seven components. The most common limitations related to: (1) eligibility criteria: 19/31 (61%) studies used post-baseline information to define baseline eligibility; (2) causal contrasts: 25 (81%) did not define whether ITT or per-protocol effects were estimated and (3) assignment procedures: 13 (42%) studies did not account for confounding by indication or relied solely on statistical confounder selection.

conclusionsDesign limitations were found in 94% of observational CER studies in RA. Target trial emulation is a structured approach for designing observational CER studies that helps to avoid potential sources of bias.

Indexed as

Research DesignAntirheumatic AgentsArthritis, RheumatoidComparative Effectiveness ResearchHumansObservational Studies as TopicAntirheumatic Agentscausal inferencecomparative effectivenessobservational studyrheumatoid arthritistarget trial emulation

Identifiers

PMID32381560
PMCPMC8693471

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.