Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33618655›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2021

A scoping review of studies using observational data to optimise dynamic treatment regimens.

Robert K Mahar, Myra B McGuinness, Bibhas Chakraborty, John B Carlin, Maarten J IJzerman, Julie A Simpson

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
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 at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Robert K MaharBiostatistics Unit, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. robert.mahar@unimelb.edu.au.ORCID 0000-0002-3643-923X
Myra B McGuinnessBiostatistics Unit, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-5422-040X
Bibhas ChakrabortyCentre for Quantitative Medicine, Duke-NUS Medical School, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0002-7366-0478
John B CarlinBiostatistics Unit, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2694-9463
Maarten J IJzerman *Cancer Health Services Research Unit, University of Melbourne Centre for Cancer Research and Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5788-5805
Julie A Simpson *Biostatistics Unit, Centre for Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2660-2013
The University of Melbourne · AUNational University of Singapore · SG

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council 1035261National Health and Medical Research Council 1104975
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDynamic treatment regimens (DTRs) formalise the multi-stage and dynamic decision problems that clinicians often face when treating chronic or progressive medical conditions. Compared to randomised controlled trials, using observational data to optimise DTRs may allow a wider range of treatments to be evaluated at a lower cost. This review aimed to provide an overview of how DTRs are optimised with observational data in practice.

methodsUsing the PubMed database, a scoping review of studies in which DTRs were optimised using observational data was performed in October 2020. Data extracted from eligible articles included target medical condition, source and type of data, statistical methods, and translational relevance of the included studies.

resultsFrom 209 PubMed abstracts, 37 full-text articles were identified, and a further 26 were screened from the reference lists, totalling 63 articles for inclusion in a narrative data synthesis. Observational DTR models are a recent development and their application has been concentrated in a few medical areas, primarily HIV/AIDS (27, 43%), followed by cancer (8, 13%), and diabetes (6, 10%). There was substantial variation in the scope, intent, complexity, and quality between the included studies. Statistical methods that were used included inverse-probability weighting (26, 41%), the parametric G-formula (16, 25%), Q-learning (10, 16%), G-estimation (4, 6%), targeted maximum likelihood/minimum loss-based estimation (4, 6%), regret regression (3, 5%), and other less common approaches (10, 16%). Notably, studies that were primarily intended to address real-world clinical questions (18, 29%) tended to use inverse-probability weighting and the parametric G-formula, relatively well-established methods, along with a large amount of data. Studies focused on methodological developments (45, 71%) tended to be more complicated and included a demonstrative real-world application only.

conclusionsAs chronic and progressive conditions become more common, the need will grow for personalised treatments and methods to estimate the effects of DTRs. Observational DTR studies will be necessary, but so far their use to inform clinical practice has been limited. Focusing on simple DTRs, collecting large and rich clinical datasets, and fostering tight partnerships between content experts and data analysts may result in more clinically relevant observational DTR studies.

Indexed as

ProbabilityClinical ProtocolsHumansAdaptive treatment policiesCausal inferenceDirected acyclic graphsDynamic treatment regimensObservational dataSequential multiple assignment randomised trials

Identifiers

PMID33618655
PMCPMC7898728
OpenAlexW3132548924

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.