randomized controlled trials as topic

随机对照试验作为主题
  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:对于无症状、不可切除的转移性结直肠癌(mCRC)患者,前期原发肿瘤切除(PTR)的价值仍存在争议。这项荟萃分析旨在评估早期PTR对无症状不可切除的mCRC的预后意义。
    方法:6月21日进行了系统的文献检索,2024.为了最大限度地减少偏见并确保可靠的证据,仅纳入比较PTR后化疗与单纯化疗的随机对照试验(RCT)和病例匹配研究(CMS).主要结果是总生存期(OS),而癌症特异性生存率(CSS)是次要结果。
    结果:纳入了涉及1221例患者的8项研究(3项RCT和5项CMS)。与单纯化疗相比,前期PTR后化疗并未改善OS(风险比[HR]0.91,95%置信区间[CI]0.79-1.04,P=0.17),但与CSS稍好相关(HR0.59,95%CI0.40-0.88,P=0.009)。
    结论:目前有限的证据表明,在无症状不可切除的mCRC患者中,前期PTR并不能改善OS,但可能会增强CSS。预计正在进行的审判将为这一问题提供更可靠的证据。
    OBJECTIVE: The value of upfront primary tumor resection (PTR) for asymptomatic unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients remains contentious. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the prognostic significance of upfront PTR for asymptomatic unresectable mCRC.
    METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on June 21st, 2024. To minimize the bias and ensure robust evidence, only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and case-matched studies (CMS) that compared PTR followed by chemotherapy to chemotherapy alone were included. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS), while cancer-specific survival (CSS) served as the secondary outcome.
    RESULTS: Eight studies (three RCTs and five CMS) involving 1221 patients were included. Compared to chemotherapy alone, upfront PTR followed by chemotherapy did not improve OS (hazard ratios [HR] 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-1.04, P = 0.17), but was associated with slightly better CSS (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.40-0.88, P = 0.009).
    CONCLUSIONS: The current limited evidence indicates that upfront PTR does not improve OS but may enhance CSS in asymptomatic unresectable mCRC patients. Ongoing trials are expected to provide more reliable evidence on this issue.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)是常见的,但诊断不足,睡眠障碍。如果未经治疗,它导致不良的健康结果,包括老年痴呆症,癌症,心血管疾病和全因死亡率。我们的目标是确定将OSA检测转移到普通实践的可行性和成本效益,以及基于全科医生(GP)的筛查如何影响整体检出率。
    方法:使用新型药品和保健产品监管机构注册装置(AcuPebbleSA100)在一般实践中发现OSA病例的随机对照试验,与常规护理和内部可行性阶段进行比较。来自西米德兰兹郡临床研究网络的各种一般实践(大约40个)样本将从他们的记录中识别参与者。符合条件的参与者将年龄在50-70岁,体重指数>30kg/m2,糖尿病(1型或2型)和/或高血压(办公室血压>145/90mmHg或正在治疗)。他们将排除已知OSA或慢性阻塞性肺疾病的个体,或者他们认为无法参加的人。经过资格筛选,同意和基线评估,参与者将被随机分为干预组或对照组.干预组的参与者将通过邮寄AcuPebble睡眠测试套件获得。控制臂中的那些将继续进行常规护理。后续问卷将在6个月完成。该研究有能力(90%)检测到5%的差异,每个手臂需要606名患者(每个手臂将招募713名患者以进行减员)。由于干预的性质,参与者和全科医生不会对分配视而不见。
    结果:主要:干预组与对照组的中度至重度OSA检出率。次要:轻度干预组的诊断时间和治疗时间与对照组相比,中度和重度OSA;比较不同测试途径的成本-效果分析。
    背景:试验于2022年11月1日开始。道德批准于2023年6月9日获得牛津中南部A研究伦理委员会(23/SC/0188)(协议修正案1.3版;更新修正案并批准于2023年8月29日重新编号为V2.0)。患者招募于2024年1月7日开始;最初的计划结束日期为2025年4月31日。结果将在试验日期结束后的12个月内上传到ISRCTN登记册,在会议上介绍,提交给同行评审的期刊,并通过我们的患者和公众参与网络分发。沃里克大学将作为试验的发起人。该试验将按照赞助商和初级保健临床试验单位的标准操作程序进行。
    背景:ISRCTN16982033。
    BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is a common, but underdiagnosed, sleep disorder. If untreated, it leads to poor health outcomes, including Alzheimer\'s disease, cancer, cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. Our aim is to determine the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of moving the testing for OSA into general practice and how general practitioner (GP)-based screening affects overall detection rates.
    METHODS: Randomised controlled trial of case finding of OSA in general practice using a novel Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency-registered device (AcuPebble SA100) compared with usual care with internal feasibility phase. A diverse sample of general practices (approximately 40) from across the West Midlands Clinical Research Network will identify participants from their records. Eligible participants will be aged 50-70 years with body mass index >30 kg/m2 and diabetes (type 1 or 2) and/or hypertension (office blood pressure >145/90 mm Hg or on treatment). They will exclude individuals with known OSA or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, or those they deem unable to take part. After eligibility screening, consent and baseline assessment, participants will be randomised to either the intervention or control group. Participants in the intervention arm will receive by post the AcuPebble sleep test kit. Those in the control arm will continue with usual care. Follow-up questionnaires will be completed at 6 months. The study is powered (90%) to detect a 5% difference and will require 606 patients in each arm (713 will be recruited to each arm to allow for attrition). Due to the nature of the intervention, participants and GPs will not be blinded to the allocation.
    RESULTS: Primary: Detection rate of moderate-to-severe OSA in the intervention group versus control group. Secondary: Time to diagnosis and time to treatment for intervention versus control group for mild, moderate and severe OSA; cost-effectiveness analysis comparing the different testing pathways.
    BACKGROUND: The trial started on 1 November 2022. Ethical approval was granted from the South Central Oxford A Research Ethics Committee on 9 June 2023 (23/SC/0188) (protocol amendment version 1.3; update with amendment and approval to renumber to V2.0 on 29 August 2023). Patient recruitment began on 7 January 2024; initial planned end date will be on 31 April 2025.Results will be uploaded to the ISRCTN register within 12 months of the end of the trial date, presented at conferences, submitted to peer-reviewed journals and distributed via our patient and public involvement networks.The University of Warwick will act as the trial sponsor. The trial will be conducted in accordance with the Sponsor and Primary Care Clinical Trials Unit standard operating procedures.
    BACKGROUND: ISRCTN 16982033.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:巴基斯坦已大大加强了其结核病(TB)主动发现病例(ACF)的能力,该能力正在该国大规模实施。然而,ACF的产量低于预期,对其在方案环境中的有效性表示关注。结核病在社区中的分布可能在空间上是异质的,在结核病患病率较高的地区靶向ACF可能有助于提高产量。SPOT-TB的主要目的是调查政策是否改变,以使用人工智能(AI)软件支持的针对ACF的地理针对性方法。MATCH-AI,可以提高巴基斯坦的产量。
    方法:SPOT-TB将使用实用的,阶梯式楔形簇随机设计。共有30个移动X射线单位及其现场团队将被随机分配以接受干预。在干预地区选择ACF的地点将主要通过使用MATCH-AI软件进行指导,该软件对分区结核病患病率进行建模并确定潜在的疾病热点。控制区将使用基于员工知识的现有选址方法,经验和历史数据的分析。主要结果指标是干预措施中检测到的细菌学证实的事件结核病相对于对照地区的差异。所有剩余的ACF相关程序和算法将不受该试验的影响。
    背景:已获得卫生服务学院的道德批准,伊斯兰堡,巴基斯坦(7-82/IERC-HSA/2022-52)和结核病共同管理股,艾滋病毒和疟疾,卫生部,监管和协调,伊斯兰堡,巴基斯坦(26-IRB-CMU-2023)。这项研究的结果将通过同行评审期刊上的出版物以及在巴基斯坦与执行伙伴和公共部门官员举行的利益相关者会议进行传播。研究结果还将在当地和国际医疗和公共卫生会议上发表。
    背景:NCT06017843。
    BACKGROUND: Pakistan has significantly strengthened its capacity for active case finding (ACF) for tuberculosis (TB) that is being implemented at scale in the country. However, yields of ACF have been lower than expected, raising concerns on its effectiveness in the programmatic setting. Distribution of TB in communities is likely to be spatially heterogeneous and targeting of ACF in areas with higher TB prevalence may help improve yields. The primary aim of SPOT-TB is to investigate whether a policy change to use a geographically targeted approach towards ACF supported by an artificial intelligence (AI) software, MATCH-AI, can improve yields in Pakistan.
    METHODS: SPOT-TB will use a pragmatic, stepped wedge cluster randomised design. A total of 30 mobile X-ray units and their field teams will be randomised to receive the intervention. Site selection for ACF in the intervention areas will be guided primarily through the use of MATCH-AI software that models subdistrict TB prevalence and identifies potential disease hotspots. Control areas will use existing approaches towards site selection that are based on staff knowledge, experience and analysis of historical data. The primary outcome measure is the difference in bacteriologically confirmed incident TB detected in the intervention relative to control areas. All remaining ACF-related procedures and algorithms will remain unaffected by this trial.
    BACKGROUND: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Health Services Academy, Islamabad, Pakistan (7-82/IERC-HSA/2022-52) and from the Common Management Unit for TB, HIV and Malaria, Ministry of Health Services, Regulation and Coordination, Islamabad, Pakistan (26-IRB-CMU-2023). Findings from this study will be disseminated through publications in peer-reviewed journals and stakeholder meetings in Pakistan with the implementing partners and public-sector officials. Findings will also be presented at local and international medical and public health conferences.
    BACKGROUND: NCT06017843.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    暂无摘要。
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Clinical Trial Protocol
    尽管印度在降低婴儿死亡率方面取得了进展,新生儿死亡率下降速度较慢,需要共同努力实现可持续发展目标3。旨在预防高危新生儿败血症的有希望的策略,脆弱的,低出生体重新生儿通过创新干预包括益生菌补充。本文传达了ProSPoNS试验调查人员决定建立一个中央终点裁决委员会(CEAC),作为2021年在试验中发布的方案的附录,以澄清主要结果。在公布的协议中,研究假设和主要目标是基于“脓毒症,“主要结局已被指定为脓毒症/PSBI,而样本量估计是根据医生诊断的脓毒症进行的。\"对齐所有上述三个,调查员会议,于2023年8月17日至18日在MGIMSSevram举行,瓦尔达,经过审议并一致同意,“医生诊断为脓毒症”是包括脓毒症/PSBI在内的主要研究结果。CEAC,由外部主题专家和包括试验统计师在内的成员主持,一个微生物学家,所有研究中心的主要研究者将采用四个标准来确定“医生诊断的败血症”:(1)血液培养状态,(2)败血症的屏幕状态,(3)PSBI/非PSBI体征和症状,和(4)每个疾病事件的临床过程。重要的是,这一澄清与批准的研究方案保持了一致性(方案号.5/7/915/2012版本3.1日期为2020年2月14日),强调对方法透明度和遵守预定义标准的承诺。建议将使用CEAC指导的决定作为多中心复杂临床试验的金标准,以实现评估结果的一致性和准确性。印度临床试验注册(CTRI)CTRI/2019/05/019197。2019年5月16日注册。
    Despite progress in reducing the infant mortality in India, the neonatal mortality decline has been slower, necessitating concerted efforts to achieve Sustainable Development Goal-3. A promising strategy aiming to prevent neonatal sepsis in high-risk, vulnerable, low birth weight neonates through an innovative intervention includes probiotic supplementation. This article communicates the decision by the ProSPoNS trial investigators to establish a Central Endpoint Adjudication Committee (CEAC) as an addendum to the protocol published in Trials in 2021 for the purpose of clarifying the primary outcome. In the published protocol, the study hypothesis and primary objective are based on \"sepsis,\" the primary outcome has been specified as sepsis/PSBI, whereas the sample size estimation was performed based on the \"physician diagnosed sepsis.\" To align all the three above, the investigators meeting, held on 17th-18th August 2023, at MGIMS Sevagram, Wardha, deliberated and unanimously agreed that \"physician diagnosed sepsis\" is the primary study outcome which includes sepsis/PSBI. The CEAC, chaired by an external subject expert and members including trial statistician, a microbiologist, and all site principal investigators will employ four criteria to determine \"physician diagnosed sepsis\": (1) blood culture status, (2) sepsis screen status, (3) PSBI/non-PSBI signs and symptoms, and (4) the clinical course for each sickness event. Importantly, this clarification maintains consistency with the approved study protocol (Protocol No. 5/7/915/2012 version 3.1 dated 14 Feb 2020), emphasizing the commitment to methodological transparency and adherence to predefined standards. The decision to utilize the guidance of a CEAC is recommended as the gold standard in multicentric complex clinical trials to achieve consistency and accuracy in assessment of outcomes.Trial registrationClinical Trial Registry of India (CTRI) CTRI/2019/05/019197. Registered on 16 May 2019.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    对已发表的内脏利什曼病(VL)疗效研究进行了系统评价(SR),以描述设计的方法学方面。行为,分析,和报告。在2000-2021年期间发表并在传染病数据观察站VL临床研究库中索引的研究符合纳入条件(N=89项研究)。在89项研究中,40人(44.9%)被随机分组,33人(37.1%)是单臂的,14项(15.7%)是非随机多臂研究,两组患者的随机化状态不清楚(2.2%).经过初步筛选,26例(29.2%)通过显微镜进行疾病确认,63例(70.8%)通过血清学和显微镜结合进行疾病确认.在3项(3.3%)研究中,治疗后随访时间<6个月,75年6个月(84.3%),11项(12.4%)研究>6个月。在四项(4.5%)研究中,复发的确认仅基于临床怀疑,64例(71.9%)寄生虫学演示,使用分子/血清学/寄生虫学方法在6(6.7%),15名(16.9%)没有信息。在40项随机研究中,仅22项(55.0%)研究报告了样本量计算.这篇综述强调了疾病诊断和治疗结果所采用的定义的巨大差异,这表明需要一个统一的试验方案。
    A systematic review (SR) of published efficacy studies in visceral leishmaniasis (VL) was undertaken to describe methodological aspects of design, conduct, analysis, and reporting. Studies published during 2000-2021 and indexed in the Infectious Diseases Data Observatory VL library of clinical studies were eligible for inclusion (N = 89 studies). Of the 89 studies, 40 (44.9%) were randomized, 33 (37.1%) were single-armed, 14 (15.7%) were nonrandomized multiarmed studies, and randomization status was unclear in two (2.2%). After initial screening, disease confirmation was done by microscopy in 26 (29.2%) and by a combination of serology and microscopy in 63 (70.8%). Post-treatment follow-up duration was <6 months in three (3.3%) studies, 6 months in 75 (84.3%), and >6 months in 11 (12.4%) studies. Confirmation of relapse was solely based on clinical suspicion in four (4.5%) studies, parasitological demonstration in 64 (71.9%), using molecular/serological/parasitological method in 6 (6.7%), and there was no information in 15 (16.9%). Of the 40 randomized studies, sample size calculation was reported in only 22 (55.0%) studies. This review highlights substantial variations in definitions adopted for disease diagnosis and therapeutic outcomes suggesting a need for a harmonized trials protocol.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:造血细胞移植(HCT)是一种对血液肿瘤和某些类型的癌症的高度侵入性和危及生命的治疗方法,这些癌症可以挑战患者的意义结构。恢复含义(即,通过接受和承诺疗法(ACT)干预来增强心理灵活性,可以帮助建立对疾病和治疗负担的更灵活和重要的解释)。因此,本试验旨在研究与最低限度强化常规护理(mEUC)对照组相比,ACT干预对HCT后患者意义形成过程的影响以及改变的潜在机制.该试验将通过单例实验设计(SCED)得到加强,其中ACT干预措施将在具有各种干预前间隔的个体之间进行比较。
    方法:总共,将招募192名符合首次自体或同种异体HCT的患者进行双臂平行随机对照试验,将在线自助14天ACT培训与教育课程进行比较(HCT后的建议)。在这两种情况下,参与者将在门诊期间每天接受一次短期调查和干预建议(每天约5-10分钟).双盲评估将在基线进行,在干预期间,立即,1个月,干预后3个月。此外,6-9名参与者将被邀请参加SCED,并在完成ACT干预之前随机分配到干预前测量长度(1-3周)。随后在第2次和第3次干预后测量进行7天观察.主要结果是意义相关的痛苦。次要结果包括心理灵活性,有意义的应对,意义,和福祉以及全球和情境意义。
    结论:这项试验是第一项整合ACT和意义制定框架以减少意义相关困扰的研究,刺激意义的创造过程,并提高HCT接受者的福祉。通过统计上严格的具体方法来查看对谁以及何时有效,将加强对干预措施的测试,以解决接受HCT的患者特有的生存问题。由于HCT人群获得干预措施的机会有限,基于网络的ACT自助计划可能会填补这一空白。
    背景:ClinicalTrials.govID:NCT06266182。2024年2月20日注册。
    BACKGROUND: Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is a highly invasive and life-threatening treatment for hematological neoplasms and some types of cancer that can challenge the patient\'s meaning structures. Restoring meaning (i.e., building more flexible and significant explanations of the disease and treatment burden) can be aided by strengthening psychological flexibility by means of an Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) intervention. Thus, this trial aims to examine the effect of the ACT intervention on the meaning-making process and the underlying mechanisms of change in patients following HCT compared to a minimally enhanced usual care (mEUC) control group. The trial will be enhanced with a single-case experimental design (SCED), where ACT interventions will be compared between individuals with various pre-intervention intervals.
    METHODS: In total, 192 patients who qualify for the first autologous or allogeneic HCT will be recruited for a two-armed parallel randomized controlled trial comparing an online self-help 14-day ACT training to education sessions (recommendations following HCT). In both conditions, participants will receive once a day a short survey and intervention proposal (about 5-10 min a day) in the outpatient period. Double-blinded assessment will be conducted at baseline, during the intervention, immediately, 1 month, and 3 months after the intervention. In addition, 6-9 participants will be invited to SCED and randomly assigned to pre-intervention measurement length (1-3 weeks) before completing ACT intervention, followed by 7-day observations at the 2nd and 3rd post-intervention measure. The primary outcome is meaning-related distress. Secondary outcomes include psychological flexibility, meaning-making coping, meanings made, and well-being as well as global and situational meaning.
    CONCLUSIONS: This trial represents the first study that integrates the ACT and meaning-making frameworks to reduce meaning-related distress, stimulate the meaning-making process, and enhance the well-being of HCT recipients. Testing of an intervention to address existential concerns unique to patients undergoing HCT will be reinforced by a statistically rigorous idiographic approach to see what works for whom and when. Since access to interventions in the HCT population is limited, the web-based ACT self-help program could potentially fill this gap.
    BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT06266182. Registered on February 20, 2024.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:模拟“目标试验”(TT),一项假设的实用随机对照试验(RCT),使用观察性数据可用于缓解比较有效性研究(CER)中常见的问题,道德上,或财务上可行。然而,心血管(CV)健康研究一直缓慢采用TT仿真。这里,我们展示了使用电子健康记录进行TT仿真的设计和分析,以研究在类风湿性关节炎(RA)患者中,在甲氨蝶呤方案中加入改善疾病的抗风湿药(DMARD)对CV事件的相对有效性.
    方法:我们使用来自西北医学的基于电子病历的RA患者队列的数据来模拟TT。在初始处方MTX(2000-2020)后3个月开始随访,包括到2020年6月30日的所有可用随访。加权合并逻辑回归用于估计CVD风险和生存率的差异。克隆用于处理不朽的时间偏差和权重,以改善基线和时变协变量失衡。
    结果:我们确定了659名符合资格的RA患者,平均随访46个月和31次MACE事件。比较开始与未开始DMARD的MACE的第24个月调整风险差异为-1.47%(95%置信区间[CI]:-4.74,1.95%),边际风险比(HR)为0.72(95%CI:0.71,1.23)。在受到不朽时间偏见的分析中,HR为0.62(95%CI:0.29-1.44)。
    结论:在此示例中,我们没有观察到MACE风险差异的证据,这一发现与以前发表的随机对照试验荟萃分析一致。对TT框架的周到应用为在观测数据中进行CER提供了机会。对先前发表的RCT的观察分析结果进行基准测试可以为解释提供可信度。
    BACKGROUND: Emulation of the \"target trial\" (TT), a hypothetical pragmatic randomized controlled trial (RCT), using observational data can be used to mitigate issues commonly encountered in comparative effectiveness research (CER) when randomized trials are not logistically, ethically, or financially feasible. However, cardiovascular (CV) health research has been slow to adopt TT emulation. Here, we demonstrate the design and analysis of a TT emulation using electronic health records to study the comparative effectiveness of the addition of a disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drug (DMARD) to a regimen of methotrexate on CV events among rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients.
    METHODS: We used data from an electronic medical records-based cohort of RA patients from Northwestern Medicine to emulate the TT. Follow-up began 3 months after initial prescription of MTX (2000-2020) and included all available follow-up through June 30, 2020. Weighted pooled logistic regression was used to estimate differences in CVD risk and survival. Cloning was used to handle immortal time bias and weights to improve baseline and time-varying covariate imbalance.
    RESULTS: We identified 659 eligible people with RA with average follow-up of 46 months and 31 MACE events. The month 24 adjusted risk difference for MACE comparing initiation vs non-initiation of a DMARD was -1.47% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -4.74, 1.95%), and the marginal hazard ratio (HR) was 0.72 (95% CI: 0.71, 1.23). In analyses subject to immortal time bias, the HR was 0.62 (95% CI: 0.29-1.44).
    CONCLUSIONS: In this sample, we did not observe evidence of differences in risk of MACE, a finding that is compatible with previously published meta-analyses of RCTs. Thoughtful application of the TT framework provides opportunities to conduct CER in observational data. Benchmarking results of observational analyses to previously published RCTs can lend credibility to interpretation.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:因果图是选择协变量的重要工具,但是关于如何最好地创建它们的应用研究有限。这里,我们使用了冠状动脉药物项目(CDP)试验的数据来评估一系列创建有向无环图(DAG)的方法.我们专注于安慰剂组的依从性对死亡率的影响,因为真正的因果效应被认为具有高度的确定性。
    方法:我们使用不同的方法确定变量和包括或排除的联系,创建了安慰剂依从性对死亡率影响的DAG。对于每个DAG,我们确定了最小的协变量调整集,用于估计我们感兴趣的因果效应,并将其应用于CDP数据的分析。
    结果:当我们仅使用基线协变量值来估计安慰剂依从性对死亡率的累积影响时,所有调整集执行类似。协变量的具体选择对这些(有偏差的)点估计影响最小,但包括非混杂预后因素导致方差估计值较小.当我们使用逆概率加权对依从性的时变协变量进行额外调整时,从通过关注预后因素创建的DAG中确定的协变量表现最好。
    结论:关于协变量选择的理论建议表明,包括不是暴露预测因子的预后因素可以减少方差而不增加偏倚。相比之下,对于不是预后因素的暴露预测因子,包含可能会导致更少的偏差控制。我们的结果在经验上证实了这一建议。我们建议手工创建DAG从识别所有潜在的预后因素开始。
    BACKGROUND: Causal graphs are an important tool for covariate selection but there is limited applied research on how best to create them. Here, we used data from the Coronary Drug Project trial to assess a range of approaches to directed acyclic graph (DAG) creation. We focused on the effect of adherence on mortality in the placebo arm, since the true causal effect is believed with a high degree of certainty.
    METHODS: We created DAGs for the effect of placebo adherence on mortality using different approaches for identifying variables and links to include or exclude. For each DAG, we identified minimal adjustment sets of covariates for estimating our causal effect of interest and applied these to analyses of the Coronary Drug Project data.
    RESULTS: When we used only baseline covariate values to estimate the cumulative effect of placebo adherence on mortality, all adjustment sets performed similarly. The specific choice of covariates had minimal effect on these (biased) point estimates, but including nonconfounding prognostic factors resulted in smaller variance estimates. When we additionally adjusted for time-varying covariates of adherence using inverse probability weighting, covariates identified from the DAG created by focusing on prognostic factors performed best.
    CONCLUSIONS: Theoretical advice on covariate selection suggests that including prognostic factors that are not exposure predictors can reduce variance without increasing bias. In contrast, for exposure predictors that are not prognostic factors, inclusion may result in less bias control. Our results empirically confirm this advice. We recommend that hand-creating DAGs begin with the identification of all potential outcome prognostic factors.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号