ReviewDiabetes care2023
A Road Map for Peer Review of Real-World Evidence Studies on Safety and Effectiveness of Treatments.
Review in Diabetes care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Twelve-Month Real-World Use of an Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System Versus Previous Therapy in a Dutch Center For Specialized Type 1 Diabetes Care.Journal of diabetes science and technology · 2026Article
- Caution in handling switchers in pharmacoepidemiologic studies estimating treatment effects: the example of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and inflammatory bowel disease.American journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
- SGLT-2 Inhibitor use and liver-related and mortality outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and compensated cirrhosis.BMC medicine · 2026Article
- Bottlenecks in advancing and applying multiomic data integration-common data resources as rate-limiting drivers-the high-impact use case of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.Briefings in bioinformatics · 2025Review
- Advancing Principled Pharmacoepidemiologic Research to Support Regulatory and Healthcare Decision Making: The Era of Real-World Evidence.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2025Review
- Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Real World Data Infrastructure: A Big-Data Resource for Study of the Impact of COVID-19 in Patient Populations With Immunocompromising Conditions.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The growing acceptance of real-world evidence (RWE) in clinical and regulatory decision-making, coupled with increasing availability of health care data and advances in automated analytic approaches, has contributed to a marked expansion of RWE studies of diabetes and other diseases. However, a recent spate of high-profile retractions highlights the need for improvements in the conduct of RWE research as well as in the associated peer review and editorial processes. We review best pharmacoepidemiologic practices and common pitfalls regarding design, measurement, analysis, data validity, appropriateness, and generalizability of RWE studies. To enhance RWE study assessments, we propose that journal editors require 1) study authors to complete RECORD-PE, a reporting guideline for pharmacoepidemiological studies on routinely collected data, 2) availability of predetermined study protocols and analysis plans, 3) inclusion of pharmacoepidemiologists on the peer review team, and 4) provision of detail on data provenance, characterization, and custodianship to facilitate assessment of the data source. We recognize that none of these steps guarantees a high-quality research study. Collectively, however, they permit an informed assessment of whether the study was adequately designed and conducted and whether the data source used was fit for purpose.
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.