Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32494150›Full record

ArticleJournal of multidisciplinary healthcare2020

Methods, Applications and Challenges in the Analysis of Interrupted Time Series Data: A Scoping Review.

Joycelyne E Ewusie, Charlene Soobiah, Erik Blondal, Joseph Beyene, Lehana Thabane, Jemila S Hamid

Abstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

6 authors.

Joycelyne E EwusieDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-4292-1134
Charlene SoobiahLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2271-3082
Erik BlondalLi Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Joseph BeyeneDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Lehana ThabaneDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Jemila S HamidDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveInterrupted time series (ITS) designs are robust quasi-experimental designs commonly used to evaluate the impact of interventions and programs implemented in healthcare settings. This scoping review aims to 1) identify and summarize existing methods used in the analysis of ITS studies conducted in health research, 2) elucidate their strengths and limitations, 3) describe their applications in health research and 4) identify any methodological gaps and challenges.

designScoping review. DATA SOURCES: Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, JSTOR, PUBMED, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library from inception until September 2017. STUDY SELECTION: Studies in health research involving ITS methods or reporting on the application of ITS designs. DATA EXTRACTION: Screening of studies was completed independently and in duplicate by two reviewers. One reviewer extracted the data from relevant studies in consultations with a second reviewer. Results of the review were presented with respect to methodological and application areas, and data were summarized using descriptive statistics.

resultsA total of 1389 articles were included, of which 98.27% (N=1365) were application papers. Segmented linear regression was the most commonly used method (26%, N=360). A small percentage (1.73%, N=24) were methods papers, of which 11 described either the development of novel methods or improvement of existing methods, 7 adapted methods from other areas of statistics, while 6 provided comparative assessment of conventional ITS methods.

conclusionA significantly increasing trend in ITS use over time is observed, where its application in health research almost tripled within the last decade. Several statistical methods are available for analyzing ITS data. Researchers should consider the types of data and validate the required assumptions for the various methods. There is a significant methodological gap in ITS analysis involving aggregated data, where analyses involving such data did not account for heterogeneity across patients and hospital settings.

Indexed as

ARIMAinterrupted time serieslimitationsmethodsscoping reviewsegmented linear regression

Identifiers

PMID32494150
PMCPMC7231782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.