Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36836227›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023

Methods for the Inclusion of Real-World Evidence in a Rare Events Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Minghong Yao, Yuning Wang, Fan Mei, Kang Zou, Ling Li, Xin Sun

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Disruptive Force of Real-World Evidence.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    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

6 authors.

Minghong YaoChinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Yuning WangChinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Fan MeiChinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Kang ZouChinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Ling LiChinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.
Xin SunChinese Evidence-Based Medicine Center and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu 610041, China.

Funding

China Medical Board CMB19-324National Natural Science Foundation of China 72204173National Natural Science Foundation of China 82274368National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars 82225049
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany rare events meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have lower statistical power, and real-world evidence (RWE) is becoming widely recognized as a valuable source of evidence. The purpose of this study is to investigate methods for including RWE in a rare events meta-analysis of RCTs and the impact on the level of uncertainty around the estimates.

methodsFour methods for the inclusion of RWE in evidence synthesis were investigated by applying them to two previously published rare events meta-analyses: the naïve data synthesis (NDS), the design-adjusted synthesis (DAS), the use of RWE as prior information (RPI), and the three-level hierarchical models (THMs). We gauged the effect of the inclusion of RWE by varying the degree of confidence placed in RWE.

resultsThis study showed that the inclusion of RWE in a rare events meta-analysis of RCTs could increase the precision of the estimates, but this depended on the method of inclusion and the level of confidence placed in RWE. NDS cannot consider the bias of RWE, and its results may be misleading. DAS resulted in stable estimates for the two examples, regardless of whether we placed high- or low-level confidence in RWE. The results of the RPI approach were sensitive to the confidence level placed in RWE. The THM was effective in allowing for accommodating differences between study types, while it had a conservative result compared with other methods.

conclusionThe inclusion of RWE in a rare events meta-analysis of RCTs could increase the level of certainty of the estimates and enhance the decision-making process. DAS might be appropriate for inclusion of RWE in a rare event meta-analysis of RCTs, but further evaluation in different scenarios of empirical or simulation studies is still warranted.

Indexed as

meta-analysisrandomized controlled trialrare eventsreal-world evidence

Identifiers

PMID36836227
PMCPMC9964527

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.