Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32407766›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical epidemiology2020

Uptake of methodological advances for synthesis of continuous and time-to-event outcomes would maximize use of the evidence base.

Suzanne C Freeman, Alex J Sutton, Nicola J Cooper

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical epidemiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. 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

3 authors.

Suzanne C FreemanDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK. Electronic address: suzanne.freeman@leicester.ac.uk.
Alex J SuttonDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK.
Nicola J CooperDepartment of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, UK.

Funding

Department of Health PDF-2018-11-ST2-007
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of the study is to establish how often continuous and time-to-event outcomes are synthesized in health technology assessment (HTA), the statistical methods and software used in their analysis and how often evidence synthesis informs decision models. STUDY DESIGN AND

settingThis is a review of National Institute of Health Research HTA reports, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) technology appraisals, and NICE guidelines reporting quantitative meta-analysis or network meta-analysis of at least one continuous or time-to-event outcome published from April 01, 2018 to March 31, 2019.

resultsWe identified 47 eligible articles. At least one continuous or time-to-event outcome was synthesized in 51% and 55% of articles, respectively. Evidence synthesis results informed decision models in two-thirds of articles. The review and expert knowledge identified five areas where methodology is available for improving the synthesis of continuous and time-to-event outcomes: i) outcomes reported on multiple scales, ii) reporting of multiple related outcomes, iii) appropriateness of the additive scale, iv) reporting of multiple time points, and v) nonproportional hazards. We identified three anticipated barriers to the uptake and implementation of these methods: i) statistical expertise, ii) software, and iii) reporting of trials.

conclusionContinuous and time-to-event outcomes are routinely reported in HTA. However, increased uptake of methodological advances could maximize the evidence base used to inform the decision making process.

Indexed as

Research DesignClinical Decision-MakingHumansTechnology Assessment, BiomedicalTimeClinical decision-makingContinuous outcomesDecision modelsEvidence synthesisHealth technology assessmentTime-to-event outcomes

Identifiers

PMID32407766
PMCPMC7435685

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.