ArticleClinical pharmacology and therapeutics2022
Assessing and Interpreting Real-World Evidence Studies: Introductory Points for New Reviewers.
Article in Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Bleeding Risk With Apixaban Versus Rivaroxaban: A Reference Trial Emulation Predicting the Results of COBRRA-VTE and COBRRA-AF Using US Health Care Claims.Circulation. Population health and outcomes · 2026Observational
- Emulating Six Cardiovascular Outcome Trials of Antidiabetic Drugs in Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes: Analyses Based on Real-World Databases from Korea and Taiwan.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2026Article
- The unregulated majority: who ensures quality in non-submission real-world studies?Frontiers in medicine · 2026Article
- A Practical Approach to Understanding Real-World Study Methodology in Cancer Research: A Vodcast.Oncology and therapy · 2025Article
- A real-world data challenge: guidance for aligning data privacy compliance and fit-for-purpose usability.Health affairs scholar · 2025Article
- A future of data-rich pharmacoepidemiology studies: transitioning to large-scale linked electronic health record + claims data.American journal of epidemiology · 2025Article
- A Real-World Evidence Primer for Advanced Practice Providers: Integrating P-Reality X Into Shared Decision-Making for People With HR+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2024Article
- Biases in Electronic Health Records Data for Generating Real-World Evidence: An Overview.Journal of healthcare informatics research · 2024Article
- Strategies to Address Current Challenges in Real-World Evidence Generation in Japan.Drugs - real world outcomes · 2023Review
- Worldwide Trends in Registering Real-World Studies at ClinicalTrials.gov: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.International journal of general medicine · 2023Article
- The growing evidence for mental health rehabilitation services and directions for future research.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2023Article
- Use of Extrapolation in New Drug Approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration.JAMA network open · 2022Article
- A Framework for Visualizing Study Designs and Data Observability in Electronic Health Record Data.Clinical epidemiology · 2022Article
- Use of Cannabis-Based Medical Products for Pediatric Health Conditions: A Systematic Review of the Recent Literature.Medical cannabis and cannabinoidsReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Nonrandomized real-world evidence (RWE) studies are conducted using healthcare data collected as part of clinical practice. As RWE studies are increasingly considered for regulatory, coverage, and other clinical decision making, nonspecialists will find themselves in the position of assessing the validity of RWE studies, a field that may be less familiar to them. This introductory guide provides conceptual guidance for reviewing RWE studies and is particularly directed at professionals for whom this is new or whose prior experience has primarily been in reviewing randomized controlled trial evidence. We focus on RWE studies that make causal inference, evaluating whether one treatment option is better, worse, or neutral compared to another. Although we provide citations to direct the reader to resources with more details on complex issues, this guide cannot substitute for years of training and expertise in the field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.