ArticleTherapeutic advances in gastroenterology2022
Composite outcomes in observational studies of Crohn's disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to assess composite and aggregate outcomes of observational studies in Crohn's disease and to evaluate whether the number and type of variables included affect the frequency of the outcome. Methods: MEDLINE [via PubMed], Scopus and Web of Science were searched to identify observational studies that enrolled patients with Crohn's disease and evaluated a composite or aggregate outcome. The proportion of patients achieving the outcome was determined and a random-effects meta-analysis was performed to evaluate how the frequency of each outcome varies according to the reporting of predefined variables. Results: From 10,257 identified records, 46 were included in the qualitative analysis and 38 in the meta-analysis. The frequency for composite and aggregate outcomes was 0.445 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.389-0.501] and 0.140 (95% CI: 0.000-0.211), respectively. When comparing composite outcomes by number of included variables, the frequency was 0.271 (95% CI: 0.000-0.405) and 0.698 (95% CI: 0.651-0.746), for one and six variables, respectively. The frequency of the composite outcome varied according to the identity of the variables being reported. Specific pairs of predefined variables had a significant effect in the frequency of composite outcomes. Conclusion: Composite outcomes with increasing number of predefined variables show an increase in frequency. Outcomes including variables such as 'Surgery' and 'Steroids' had higher frequencies when compared with the ones that did not include these variables. These results show that the frequency of composite outcomes is dependent on the number and type of variables being reported.
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.