Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37495391›Full record

ArticleBMJ open2023

Evaluating the impact of including non-randomised studies of interventions in meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials: a protocol for a meta-epidemiological study.

Minghong Yao, Yuning Wang, Jason W Busse, Matthias Briel, Fan Mei, Guowei Li, Kang Zou, Ling Li, Xin Sun

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Phenobarbital treatment of alcohol withdrawal in the emergency department: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2024
    Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
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

9 authors.

Minghong YaoInstitute of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Yuning WangInstitute of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Jason W BusseMichael G DeGroote National Pain Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0178-8712
Matthias BrielDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-2070-5230
Fan MeiInstitute of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Guowei LiDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-3472-8513
Kang ZouInstitute of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Ling LiInstitute of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China ebmliling@hotmail.com sunx79@hotmail.com.
Xin SunInstitute of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine, Chinese Evidence-based Medicine Center, and MAGIC China Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China ebmliling@hotmail.com sunx79@hotmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-6554-7088

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionAlthough interest in including non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs) in meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is growing, estimates of effectiveness obtained from NRSIs are vulnerable to greater bias than RCTs. The objectives of this study are to: (1) explore how NRSIs can be integrated into a meta-analysis of RCTs; (2) assess concordance of the evidence from non-randomised and randomised trials and explore factors associated with agreement; and (3) investigate the impact on estimates of pooled bodies of evidence when NRSIs are included. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic survey of 210 systematic reviews that include both RCTs and NRSIs, published from 2017 to 2022. We will randomly select reviews, stratified in a 1:1 ratio by Core vs non-Core clinical journals, as defined by the National Library of Medicine. Teams of paired reviewers will independently determine eligibility and abstract data using standardised, pilot-tested forms. The concordance of the evidence will be assessed by exploring agreement in the relative effect reported by NRSIs and RCT addressing the same clinical question, defined as similarity of the population, intervention/exposure, control and outcomes. We will conduct univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses to examine the association of prespecified study characteristics with agreement in the estimates between NRSIs and RCTs. We will calculate the ratio of the relative effect estimate from NRSIs over that from RCTs, along with the corresponding 95% CI. We will use a bias-corrected meta-analysis model to investigate the influence on pooled estimates when NRSIs are included in the evidence synthesis. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required. The findings of this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and condensed summaries for clinicians, health policymakers and guideline developers regarding the design, conduct, analysis, and interpretation of meta-analysis that integrate RCTs and NRSIs.

Indexed as

PublicationsBiasEpidemiologic StudiesHumansMeta-Analysis as TopicNon-Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicUnited Statesepidemiologystatistics & research methodssystematic review

Identifiers

PMID37495391
PMCPMC10373676

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.