Individual participant data

个人参与者数据
  • 文章类型: Systematic Review
    观察数据提供了医学中宝贵的现实世界信息,但是需要某些方法论上的考虑来得出因果估计。在这次系统审查中,我们评估了使用非随机暴露进行的个体水平患者数据荟萃分析(IPD-MA)的方法和报告质量,发表于2009年、2014年和2019年,试图估计医学中的因果关系。我们筛选了超过16,000个标题和摘要,在167篇被认为可能符合条件的文章中,审查了45篇全文,并将29项纳入分析。不幸的是,我们发现因果方法很少被实施,和报告一般较差的研究。具体来说,29篇文章中只有3篇使用了准实验方法,没有研究使用G方法来调整时变混杂因素。为了解决这些问题,我们建议医生和方法学家之间加强合作,以确保因果方法在IPD-MA中得到正确实施。此外,我们提出了使用因果方法的IPD-MA报告指南的建议清单。该清单可以改善报告,从而潜在地提高IPD-MA的质量和可信度,这可以被认为是卫生政策最有价值的证据来源之一。
    Observational data provide invaluable real-world information in medicine, but certain methodological considerations are required to derive causal estimates. In this systematic review, we evaluated the methodology and reporting quality of individual-level patient data meta-analyses (IPD-MAs) conducted with non-randomized exposures, published in 2009, 2014, and 2019 that sought to estimate a causal relationship in medicine. We screened over 16,000 titles and abstracts, reviewed 45 full-text articles out of the 167 deemed potentially eligible, and included 29 into the analysis. Unfortunately, we found that causal methodologies were rarely implemented, and reporting was generally poor across studies. Specifically, only three of the 29 articles used quasi-experimental methods, and no study used G-methods to adjust for time-varying confounding. To address these issues, we propose stronger collaborations between physicians and methodologists to ensure that causal methodologies are properly implemented in IPD-MAs. In addition, we put forward a suggested checklist of reporting guidelines for IPD-MAs that utilize causal methods. This checklist could improve reporting thereby potentially enhancing the quality and trustworthiness of IPD-MAs, which can be considered one of the most valuable sources of evidence for health policy.
    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:为临床试验提供数据共享声明(DSS)已被不同的利益相关者强制要求。DSS是用于澄清是否存在共享个体参与者数据(IPD)的意图的设备。缺少的是对DSS是否提供有关IPD二次使用数据共享条件的清晰易懂的信息的详细评估。
    方法:从ECRIN临床研究元数据储存库中随机抽取200个带有明确DSS的COVID-19临床试验。对DSS进行了评估和分类,由两名经验丰富的专家和一名在数据共享(DS)方面经验较少的评估员,分为不同的类别(不清楚,没有分享,没有计划,是的,但含糊不清,是的,根据要求,是指定的存储位置,是的,但条件复杂)。
    结果:两位专家之间的一致是中等到实质性的(kappa=0.62,95%CI[0.55,0.70])。当这些专家与经验不足且缺乏数据共享培训的第三人(“评估员”)(kappa=0.33,95%CI[0.25,0.41];0.35,95%CI[0.27,0.43])进行比较时,一致性大大降低。在两位专家之间,在独立主持人的监督下,这些案件达成了共识,两位专家都不同意,结果被用作进一步分析的“黄金标准”。在63.5%(127/200)的病例中至少表达了一定程度的DS(数据共享)意愿。在这些案件中,大约一个季度(31/127)是模糊的支持数据共享的声明,但没有有用的细节。在大约一半的情况下(60/127),有人说IPD可以通过请求获得。仅在略高于10%的情况下(15/127),有人指出IPD将被转移到特定的数据存储库。在其余情况下(21/127),描述或引用了一个更复杂的制度,无法分配给前三个组中的一个。由于协商一致的会议,分类系统已更新。
    结论:研究表明,当前的DSS暗示可能的数据共享通常不容易解释,即使是相对有经验的员工。基于机器的解释,这对于任何实际应用都是必要的,目前是不可能的。机器学习和/或自然语言处理技术可能会提高机器的可操作性,但将代表一个非常大的投资的研究努力。对于数据提供商来说,更便宜、更容易的选择是,数据请求者,资助者和平台采用更清晰的,更结构化、更标准化的指定方法,提供和收集DSS。
    背景:该研究的协议已在ZENODO上预先注册(https://zenodo.org/record/7064624#。Y4DIAHbMJD8)。
    BACKGROUND: The provision of data sharing statements (DSS) for clinical trials has been made mandatory by different stakeholders. DSS are a device to clarify whether there is intention to share individual participant data (IPD). What is missing is a detailed assessment of whether DSS are providing clear and understandable information about the conditions for data sharing of IPD for secondary use.
    METHODS: A random sample of 200 COVID-19 clinical trials with explicit DSS was drawn from the ECRIN clinical research metadata repository. The DSS were assessed and classified, by two experienced experts and one assessor with less experience in data sharing (DS), into different categories (unclear, no sharing, no plans, yes but vague, yes on request, yes with specified storage location, yes but with complex conditions).
    RESULTS: Between the two experts the agreement was moderate to substantial (kappa=0.62, 95% CI [0.55, 0.70]). Agreement considerably decreased when these experts were compared with a third person who was less experienced and trained in data sharing (\"assessor\") (kappa=0.33, 95% CI [0.25, 0.41]; 0.35, 95% CI [0.27, 0.43]). Between the two experts and under supervision of an independent moderator, a consensus was achieved for those cases, where both experts had disagreed, and the result was used as \"gold standard\" for further analysis. At least some degree of willingness of DS (data sharing) was expressed in 63.5% (127/200) cases. Of these cases, around one quarter (31/127) were vague statements of support for data sharing but without useful detail. In around half of the cases (60/127) it was stated that IPD could be obtained by request. Only in in slightly more than 10% of the cases (15/127) it was stated that the IPD would be transferred to a specific data repository. In the remaining cases (21/127), a more complex regime was described or referenced, which could not be allocated to one of the three previous groups. As a result of the consensus meetings, the classification system was updated.
    CONCLUSIONS: The study showed that the current DSS that imply possible data sharing are often not easy to interpret, even by relatively experienced staff. Machine based interpretation, which would be necessary for any practical application, is currently not possible. Machine learning and / or natural language processing techniques might improve machine actionability, but would represent a very substantial investment of research effort. The cheaper and easier option would be for data providers, data requestors, funders and platforms to adopt a clearer, more structured and more standardised approach to specifying, providing and collecting DSS.
    BACKGROUND: The protocol for the study was pre-registered on ZENODO ( https://zenodo.org/record/7064624#.Y4DIAHbMJD8 ).
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Meta-Analysis
    背景:在少数纳入研究的个体参与者数据荟萃分析(IPDMA)中,对系统性缺失离散变量的多重插补研究不足。因此,本研究旨在评估三种多重插补策略的性能-完全条件规范(FCS),多元正态(MVN),条件分位数插补(CQI)-关于瑞典国家衰老与护理研究(SNAC)中步态速度的系统性缺失数据。
    方法:总共,根据SNAC的特点,用四项前瞻性队列研究模拟了1000IPDMA。使用两阶段共同效应多变量逻辑模型分析了三种多重填补策略,该模型针对三个水平的步态速度(一项研究中缺失100%)对5年死亡率的影响,共同比值比设置为OR1=0.55(0.8-1.2vs≤0.8m/s),OR2=0.29(>1.2vs≤0.8m/s)。
    结果:死亡率比值比OR1(相对偏倚%)的平均综合估计值为0.58(8.2%),0.58(7.5%),FCS为0.55(0.7%),MVN,和CQI,分别。死亡率比值比OR2(相对偏差%)的平均综合估计值为0.30(2.5%),0.33(10.0%),FCS为0.29(0.9%),MVN,和CQI分别。
    结论:在我们对基于SNAC的IPDMA的模拟中,其中一项研究系统地丢失了步态速度数据,这三种插补方法表现相对较好。对于CQI方法发现最小的偏差。
    There is insufficient investigation of multiple imputation for systematically missing discrete variables in individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) with a small number of included studies. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the performance of three multiple imputation strategies - fully conditional specification (FCS), multivariate normal (MVN), conditional quantile imputation (CQI) - on systematically missing data on gait speed in the Swedish National Study on Aging and Care (SNAC).
    In total, 1 000 IPDMA were simulated with four prospective cohort studies based on the characteristics of the SNAC. The three multiple imputation strategies were analysed with a two-stage common-effect multivariable logistic model targeting the effect of three levels of gait speed (100% missing in one study) on 5-years mortality with common odds ratios set to OR1 = 0.55 (0.8-1.2 vs ≤0.8 m/s), and OR2 = 0.29 (>1.2 vs ≤0.8 m/s).
    The average combined estimate for the mortality odds ratio OR1 (relative bias %) were 0.58 (8.2%), 0.58 (7.5%), and 0.55 (0.7%) for the FCS, MVN, and CQI, respectively. The average combined estimate for the mortality odds ratio OR2 (relative bias %) were 0.30 (2.5%), 0.33 (10.0%), and 0.29 (0.9%) for the FCS, MVN, and CQI respectively.
    In our simulations of an IPDMA based on the SNAC where gait speed data was systematically missing in one study, all three imputation methods performed relatively well. The smallest bias was found for the CQI approach.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Meta-Analysis
    背景:仅对表现良好的截止结果进行选择性报告会导致在基于问卷的筛选工具的初步研究和综合结果的荟萃分析中对准确性的估计有偏差。通过双变量随机效应模型(BREM)对每个截止点的敏感性和特异性进行个体参与者数据荟萃分析(IPDMA)可以克服此问题。然而,IPDMA很费力,取决于成功获取主数据集的能力,和BREM忽略了初级研究中截止值之间的相关性。
    方法:我们比较了Steinhauser等人开发的三种最近的多重截止模型的性能。,琼斯等人。,还有Hoyer和Kuss,当荟萃分析具有多个截止点的诊断准确性研究时,这说明了截止点的缺失,到每次截止时安装的BREM。我们使用了来自爱丁堡产后抑郁量表(EPDS;4475名参与者,758例抑郁症)。我们将三个多个截止模型和BREM中的每一个拟合到一个数据集,该数据集具有来自每个研究的仅公布的截止结果(公布的数据)和具有所有截止结果的IPD数据集(完整的IPD数据)。我们用每个截止值和曲线下面积的95%置信区间(CI)估计合并的灵敏度和特异性。
    结果:与符合完整IPD数据的BREM相比,Steinhauser等人。,琼斯等人。,和Hoyer和Kuss模型拟合公布的数据产生了类似的接收机工作特性曲线;虽然,Hoyer和Kuss模型的曲线下面积较低,主要是由于在较低的截止条件下估计灵敏度略低。当将三个多个截止模型拟合到完整的IPD数据时,观察到类似的结果模式。重要的是,所有模型的敏感性和特异性均具有相似的95%CI,CI宽度随着敏感性的截止水平而增加,随着特异性的截止水平而减少,甚至是分别处理每个截止值的BREM。
    结论:当只有公布的数据可用时,多种截止模型似乎是有利的方法。虽然收集IPD是昂贵和耗时的,IPD可以促进无法仅使用已发布数据进行的亚组分析。
    BACKGROUND: Selective reporting of results from only well-performing cut-offs leads to biased estimates of accuracy in primary studies of questionnaire-based screening tools and in meta-analyses that synthesize results. Individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA) of sensitivity and specificity at each cut-off via bivariate random-effects models (BREMs) can overcome this problem. However, IPDMA is laborious and depends on the ability to successfully obtain primary datasets, and BREMs ignore the correlation between cut-offs within primary studies.
    METHODS: We compared the performance of three recent multiple cut-off models developed by Steinhauser et al., Jones et al., and Hoyer and Kuss, that account for missing cut-offs when meta-analyzing diagnostic accuracy studies with multiple cut-offs, to BREMs fitted at each cut-off. We used data from 22 studies of the accuracy of the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (EPDS; 4475 participants, 758 major depression cases). We fitted each of the three multiple cut-off models and BREMs to a dataset with results from only published cut-offs from each study (published data) and an IPD dataset with results for all cut-offs (full IPD data). We estimated pooled sensitivity and specificity with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each cut-off and the area under the curve.
    RESULTS: Compared to the BREMs fitted to the full IPD data, the Steinhauser et al., Jones et al., and Hoyer and Kuss models fitted to the published data produced similar receiver operating characteristic curves; though, the Hoyer and Kuss model had lower area under the curve, mainly due to estimating slightly lower sensitivity at lower cut-offs. When fitting the three multiple cut-off models to the full IPD data, a similar pattern of results was observed. Importantly, all models had similar 95% CIs for sensitivity and specificity, and the CI width increased with cut-off levels for sensitivity and decreased with an increasing cut-off for specificity, even the BREMs which treat each cut-off separately.
    CONCLUSIONS: Multiple cut-off models appear to be the favorable methods when only published data are available. While collecting IPD is expensive and time consuming, IPD can facilitate subgroup analyses that cannot be conducted with published data only.
    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
    已经提出了许多关于广泛共享去识别的论点,参与者级别的临床试验数据。然而,务实临床试验(PCT)中的数据共享提出了道德挑战。虽然先前的奖学金描述了多氯三联苯的各个方面,这些方面引起了数据共享的不同考虑,没有报告说,在多氯三联苯的数据共享努力方面处于领先地位的人的经验,包括如何应对这些特殊挑战。为了解决这个差距,我们采访了主要利益相关者,重点是分享多氯三联苯的数据所带来的道德问题。
    我们采用目的性抽样的方式招募了受访者,以反映受扩大PCT数据共享影响的利益相关者群体的范围。通过半结构化面试,我们探索了受访者关于分享去识别的经验和看法,来自PCT的个人数据。使用综合方法来确定和描述关键主题。
    我们在2022年4月至9月间进行了40次采访。通过分析出现了五个主要主题:(1)在放弃或更改同意下共享收集的数据方面的挑战;(2)关于PCT患者对数据共享的偏好的观点相互矛盾;(3)确定超出同意的尊重促进做法;(4)对共享PCT数据的风险或负担增加的担忧;(5)关于共享PCT数据可能带来的好处的不同观点。
    我们的数据表明,在如何实现广泛共享去识别,来自PCT的个人数据,并建议那些颁布和实施数据共享政策的人必须对PCT特定的考虑敏感。未来的工作可以为调整数据共享政策和做法的努力提供信息,以反映多氯三联苯带来的挑战,包括分享成功应对这些紧张局势的试验经验。
    UNASSIGNED: Numerous arguments have been advanced for broadly sharing de-identified, participant-level clinical trial data. However, data sharing in pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) presents ethical challenges. While prior scholarship has described aspects of PCTs that raise distinct considerations for data sharing, there have been no reports of the experiences of those at the leading edge of data-sharing efforts for PCTs, including how these particular challenges have been navigated. To address this gap, we conducted interviews with key stakeholders, with a focus on the ethical issues presented by sharing data from PCTs.
    UNASSIGNED: We recruited respondents using purposive sampling to reflect the range of stakeholder groups affected by efforts to expand PCT data sharing. Through semi-structured interviews, we explored respondents\' experiences and perceptions about sharing de-identified, individual-level data from PCTs. An integrated approach was used to identify and describe key themes.
    UNASSIGNED: We conducted 40 interviews between April and September 2022. Five overarching themes emerged through analysis: (1) challenges in sharing data collected under a waiver or alteration of consent; (2) conflicting views regarding PCT patient-subject preferences for data sharing; (3) identification of respect-promoting practices beyond consent; (4) concerns about elevated risks or burdens from sharing PCT data; and (5) diverse views about the likely benefits resulting from sharing PCT data.
    UNASSIGNED: Our data indicate unresolved tensions in how to fulfill the expectation to broadly share de-identified, individual-level data from PCTs, and suggest that those promulgating and implementing data-sharing policies must be sensitive to PCT-specific considerations. Future work could inform efforts to tailor data-sharing policy and practice to reflect the challenges presented by PCTs, including sharing experiences from trials that have successfully navigated these tensions.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Meta-Analysis
    背景:IVF和IUI联合卵巢刺激(IUI-OS)广泛用于治疗无法解释的不孕症。IUI-OS通常被认为是一线治疗,只有当IUI-OS在几次尝试后都不成功时,才进行IVF。然而,人们对使用IVF进行即时治疗越来越感兴趣,因为它被认为会导致更高的活产率和更短的怀孕时间。
    目的:比较IVF和IUI-OS的随机对照试验(RCT)有不同的研究设计和发现。一些RCT使用复杂的算法来结合IVF和IUI-OS,而其他人在两组之间的随访时间不相等,或者在每个周期的基础上比较治疗,引入偏见。在一致的时间框架内比较IVF和IUI-OS的累积活产率对于公平的头对头比较是必要的。以前对RCT的荟萃分析没有考虑怀孕所需的时间,这是不可能使用聚合数据。个体参与者数据荟萃分析(IPD-MA)允许在不同试验和时间到事件分析方法中对随访时间进行标准化。我们进行了这种IPD-MA,以调查IVF是否增加了累积活产率,考虑到导致怀孕的时间,并与IUI-OS相比,降低了多胎妊娠率。
    方法:我们搜索了MEDLINE,EMBASE,中部,PsycINFO,CINAHL,和Cochrane妇科和生育小组专业登记册,以确定在2021年6月之前完成数据收集的RCT。2023年1月进行了搜索更新。在无法解释的不孕症夫妇中比较IVF/ICSI与IUI-OS的RCT是合格的。我们邀请了符合条件的研究的作者团体加入IPD-MA,并分享他们的RCT的去识别IPD。在合成前检查并标准化IPD。使用偏见风险2工具评估证据质量。
    结果:在八个潜在合格的RCT中,两个被认为是等待分类。在其他六项试验中,四名共有934名女性的IPD,其中550个分配给IVF,383个分配给IUI-OS。因为干预措施无法失明,两个RCT有很高的偏倚风险,一个人有一些顾虑,其中一人的偏倚风险很低。考虑到怀孕导致活产的时间,与IUI-OS相比,IVF中的累积活产率并没有显着提高(4个随机对照试验,908个女人,50.3%对43.2%,风险比1.19,95%CI0.81-1.74,I2=42.4%)。对于安全性的主要结果,IVF中的多胎妊娠率并不明显低于IUI-OS(3个RCT,890名女性,3.8%对所有随机分组的夫妇的5.2%,比值比0.78,95%CI0.41-1.50,I2=0.0%)。
    结论:没有有力的证据表明,在无法解释的不孕症夫妇中,IVF比IUI-OS更快地实现了妊娠,从而导致了活产。IVF和IUI-OS在治疗无法解释的不孕症的有效性和安全性方面都是可行的选择。在临床决策中需要权衡干预措施的相关成本和夫妇的偏好。
    BACKGROUND: IVF and IUI with ovarian stimulation (IUI-OS) are widely used in managing unexplained infertility. IUI-OS is generally considered first-line therapy, followed by IVF only if IUI-OS is unsuccessful after several attempts. However, there is a growing interest in using IVF for immediate treatment because it is believed to lead to higher live birth rates and shorter time to pregnancy.
    OBJECTIVE: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IVF versus IUI-OS had varied study designs and findings. Some RCTs used complex algorithms to combine IVF and IUI-OS, while others had unequal follow-up time between arms or compared treatments on a per-cycle basis, which introduced biases. Comparing cumulative live birth rates of IVF and IUI-OS within a consistent time frame is necessary for a fair head-to-head comparison. Previous meta-analyses of RCTs did not consider the time it takes to achieve pregnancy, which is not possible using aggregate data. Individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) allows standardization of follow-up time in different trials and time-to-event analysis methods. We performed this IPD-MA to investigate if IVF increases cumulative live birth rate considering the time leading to pregnancy and reduces multiple pregnancy rate compared to IUI-OS in couples with unexplained infertility.
    METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register to identify RCTs that completed data collection before June 2021. A search update was carried out in January 2023. RCTs that compared IVF/ICSI to IUI-OS in couples with unexplained infertility were eligible. We invited author groups of eligible studies to join the IPD-MA and share the deidentified IPD of their RCTs. IPD were checked and standardized before synthesis. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool.
    RESULTS: Of eight potentially eligible RCTs, two were considered awaiting classification. In the other six trials, four shared IPD of 934 women, of which 550 were allocated to IVF and 383 to IUI-OS. Because the interventions were unable to blind, two RCTs had a high risk of bias, one had some concerns, and one had a low risk of bias. Considering the time to pregnancy leading to live birth, the cumulative live birth rate was not significantly higher in IVF compared to that in IUI-OS (4 RCTs, 908 women, 50.3% versus 43.2%, hazard ratio 1.19, 95% CI 0.81-1.74, I2 = 42.4%). For the safety primary outcome, the rate of multiple pregnancy was not significantly lower in IVF than IUI-OS (3 RCTs, 890 women, 3.8% versus 5.2% of all couples randomized, odds ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.41-1.50, I2 = 0.0%).
    CONCLUSIONS: There is no robust evidence that in couples with unexplained infertility IVF achieves pregnancy leading to live birth faster than IUI-OS. IVF and IUI-OS are both viable options in terms of effectiveness and safety for managing unexplained infertility. The associated costs of interventions and the preference of couples need to be weighed in clinical decision-making.
    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:内脏利什曼病(VL)是一种寄生虫病,每年估计发生30000例新病例。尽管贫血是VL的常见血液学表现,治疗后不同血液学特征的演变仍知之甚少.计划进行个体参与者数据荟萃分析(IPD-MA),以表征VL患者的血液学动力学。
    方法:传染病数据观察站(IDDO)VL数据平台是通过系统检索已发表文献(PROSPERO注册:CRD42021284622)确定的治疗性研究中的IPD的全球存储库。该平台目前将临床试验的数据集标准化为通用数据格式。IDDOVL数据平台中符合纳入资格标准的研究的相应作者和主要研究者被邀请成为IPD-MA协作的一部分。将构建混合效应多变量回归模型,以通过考虑研究地点内的聚类来识别血液学参数的决定因素。
    背景:本IPD-MA符合牛津热带研究伦理委员会(OxTREC)授予IDDO的伦理审查豁免标准,因为该研究包括对现有匿名数据的二次分析(2023年3月29日获得豁免,OxTRECREF:IDDO)。伦理批准由ICMR-Rajendra纪念医学科学研究所伦理委员会批准(信号:RMRI/EC/30/2022),2022年7月4日。这项分析的结果将在会议上传播,IDDO网站和开放获取期刊上的同行评审出版物。这项研究的结果对于区域和全球一级的控制方案至关重要,政策制定者和团体开发新的VL治疗。
    CRD42021284622。
    Visceral leishmaniasis (VL) is a parasitic disease with an estimated 30 000 new cases occurring annually. Despite anaemia being a common haematological manifestation of VL, the evolution of different haematological characteristics following treatment remains poorly understood. An individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) is planned to characterise the haematological dynamics in patients with VL.
    The Infectious Diseases Data Observatory (IDDO) VL data platform is a global repository of IPD from therapeutic studies identified through a systematic search of published literature (PROSPERO registration: CRD42021284622). The platform currently holds datasets from clinical trials standardised to a common data format. Corresponding authors and principal investigators of the studies indexed in the IDDO VL data platform meeting the eligibility criteria for inclusion were invited to be part of the collaborative IPD-MA. Mixed-effects multivariable regression models will be constructed to identify determinants of haematological parameters by taking clustering within study sites into account.
    This IPD-MA meets the criteria for waiver of ethical review as defined by the Oxford Tropical Research Ethics Committee (OxTREC) granted to IDDO, as the research consists of secondary analysis of existing anonymised data (exempt granted on 29 March 2023, OxTREC REF: IDDO). Ethics approval was granted by the ICMR-Rajendra Memorial Research Institute of Medical Sciences ethics committee (letter no.: RMRI/EC/30/2022) on 4 July 2022. The results of this analysis will be disseminated at conferences, the IDDO website and peer-reviewed publications in open-access journals. The findings of this research will be critically important for control programmes at regional and global levels, policymakers and groups developing new VL treatments.
    CRD42021284622.
    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:随着《精神疾病诊断和统计手册》文本修订版的发布,第5版(DSM-5-TR),纳入了长期悲伤障碍(PGD)的标准。这就需要根据这些标准研究悲伤轨迹。目的:这是第一个研究基于DSM-5-TR的PGD症状水平的潜在轨迹,并测试特定的危险因素(例如死亡原因)是否预测PGD轨迹。方法:我们使用在丹麦和荷兰失去亲人的成年人(N=398)中丢失后6-12、13-24和25-60个月收集的汇总现有数据评估了潜在的DSM-5-TRPGD轨迹。采用潜在生长混合模型(LGMM)来确定轨迹。使用多项逻辑回归分析来检查哪些风险因素可以预测类别成员。结果:具有二次项的四类LGMM解决方案是数据的最佳拟合。这个解决方案代表了四个轨迹:高稳定PGD(6%),高PGD快速恢复(10%),高PGD慢回收率(35%),和低PGD症状(49%)。与高稳定PGD和高PGD缓慢恢复轨迹相比,受教育程度较高的参与者更有可能被分配到低PGD症状轨迹。与低PGD症状轨迹相比,非自然死亡原因增加了处于高稳定PGD和高PGD缓慢恢复轨迹的可能性。结论:与先前的研究一致,低PGD症状轨迹是最常见的.少数人在损失后的五年内经历了高水平和稳定的PGD。大约三分之一的参与者经历了缓慢下降的高急性悲伤水平;缓慢下降的症状与个体的功能有关,需要进一步关注。这项研究表明,少数失去亲人的人发展为急性PGD症状,在损失后五年内不会减少,强调需要对PGD进行早期筛查,以防止长期投诉。
    这是第一个基于DSM-5-TR长期悲伤障碍(PGD)标准的潜在轨迹研究。使用潜在生长混合物模型分析数据。稳定高(6%),快速恢复(10%),恢复缓慢(35%),出现低症状(49%)PGD轨迹。PGD的早期筛查和治疗似乎是有必要的。
    Background: With the release of the text revision of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition (DSM-5-TR), criteria for Prolonged Grief Disorder (PGD) were included. This necessitates studying grief trajectories based on these criteria.Objective: This is the first study examining latent trajectories of DSM-5-TR-based PGD symptom levels and testing whether specific risk factors (e.g. cause of death) predicted PGD trajectories.Method: We evaluated latent DSM-5-TR PGD trajectories using pooled existing data collected at 6-12, 13-24, and 25-60 months post-loss in Danish and Dutch bereaved adults (N = 398). Latent Growth Mixture Modelling (LGMM) was employed to determine the trajectories. Multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to examine which risk factors predicted class membership.Results: The four-class LGMM solution with a quadratic term was best-fitting the data. This solution represented four trajectories: High stable PGD (6%), High PGD quick recovery (10%), High PGD slow recovery (35%), and Low PGD symptoms (49%). Participants with a higher educational level were more likely to be assigned to the Low PGD symptoms trajectory compared to High stable PGD and High PGD slow recovery trajectories. Unnatural causes of death increased the likelihood of being in the High stable PGD and High PGD slow recovery trajectories compared to the Low PGD symptoms trajectory.Conclusions: Consistent with prior research, the Low PGD symptoms trajectory was the most common. A significant minority experienced high and stable levels of PGD within five years after the loss. About one-third of participants experienced high acute grief levels that decreased slowly; how slow decreasing symptoms relate to an individual\'s functioning requires further attention. This study demonstrates that a significant minority of bereaved people develop acute PGD symptomatology that does not diminish within five years post-loss, emphasizing the need for early screening for PGD to prevent long-lasting complaints.
    This is the first latent trajectory study based on DSM-5-TR Prolonged Grief Disorder (PGD) criteria. Data were analysed using latent growth mixture modelling.Stable high (6%), quick recovery (10%), slow recovery (35%), low symptoms (49%) PGD trajectories arose.Early screening and treatment of PGD seems warranted.
    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:抑郁症是一种非常常见和反复发作的疾病。预测谁是复发或复发的最大风险可以为临床实践提供信息。将机器学习方法应用于个人参与者数据(IPD)可以有望提高风险预测的准确性。
    方法:使用四个随机对照试验(RCT)的个体数据来评估抗抑郁药治疗与逐渐减少的心理干预([公式:见正文]),以确定复发和/或复发的预测因子。评估了十个基线预测因子。应用具有和不具有梯度提升的决策树。为了研究决策树分类的鲁棒性,我们还进行了补充逻辑回归分析.
    结果:年龄的组合,抑郁症的发病年龄,与仅基于抑郁严重程度的分类器相比,抑郁严重程度显着增强了对复发风险的预测。研究的决策树可以(I)准确地识别摄入的复发患者,特异性,灵敏度约为55%(无梯度增强)和58%(有梯度增强),和(Ii)略微优于基于逻辑回归的分类器。
    结论:基于多个而非单风险指标的决策树分类器可能有助于制定治疗分层策略。这些分类模型有可能有助于开发旨在有效地优先考虑最需要治疗的个人的方法。我们的结果还强调了在理解如何准确预测抑郁症复发方面存在的差距。
    Depression is a highly common and recurrent condition. Predicting who is at most risk of relapse or recurrence can inform clinical practice. Applying machine-learning methods to Individual Participant Data (IPD) can be promising to improve the accuracy of risk predictions.
    Individual data of four Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) evaluating antidepressant treatment compared to psychological interventions with tapering ([Formula: see text]) were used to identify predictors of relapse and/or recurrence. Ten baseline predictors were assessed. Decision trees with and without gradient boosting were applied. To study the robustness of decision-tree classifications, we also performed a complementary logistic regression analysis.
    The combination of age, age of onset of depression, and depression severity significantly enhances the prediction of relapse risk when compared to classifiers solely based on depression severity. The studied decision trees can (i) identify relapse patients at intake with an accuracy, specificity, and sensitivity of about 55% (without gradient boosting) and 58% (with gradient boosting), and (ii) slightly outperform classifiers that are based on logistic regression.
    Decision tree classifiers based on multiple-rather than single-risk indicators may be useful for developing treatment stratification strategies. These classification models have the potential to contribute to the development of methods aimed at effectively prioritizing treatment for those individuals who require it the most. Our results also underline the existing gaps in understanding how to accurately predict depressive relapse.
    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
    在精神分裂症谱系障碍中,大麻使用与阳性症状之间的关联是有据可查的,尤其是通过荟萃分析。然而,关于阴性症状的研究结果不一致,而其他方面,如混乱,抑郁症,和兴奋,没有被调查。此外,荟萃分析使用汇总数据丢弃重要的混杂变量,这是偏差的来源。
    PubMed,从成立到2022年9月27日,ScienceDirect和PsycINFO用于搜索出版物。我们联系了相关研究的作者,以提取原始数据集并进行个人参与者数据荟萃分析(IPDMA)。纳入标准是:通过阳性和阴性综合征量表(PANSS)评估的精神分裂症谱系障碍患者的心理病理学;大麻使用者必须诊断出大麻使用障碍或每周至少两次使用大麻。主要结果是通过3因素提取的PANSS子得分(阳性,负和一般)和5因素(正,负,杂乱无章,抑郁症,兴奋)结构。预注册可通过Prospero访问:IDCRD42022329172。
    在1149项确定的研究中,65个符合条件,21个数据集被共享,共3677例IPD和3053例完整病例。调整后的多变量分析显示,相对于不使用,大麻使用与积极维度的严重程度更高相关(3因素:调整后的平均差,aMD=0.34,95%置信区间,CI=[0.03;0.66];5因素:aMD=0.38,95%CI=[0.08;0.63]),负维度的严重程度较低(3因素:aMD=-0.49,95%CI[-0.90;-0.09];5因素:aMD=-0.50,95%CI=[-0.91;-0.08]),兴奋程度维度较高(aMD=0.16,95%CI=[0.03;0.28])。未发现大麻使用与混乱(aMD=-0.13,95%CI=[-0.42;0.17])或抑郁(aMD=-0.14,95%CI=[-0.34;0.06])之间存在关联。
    无法从当前结果中推断出因果关系。这些发现可能有利于大麻对阳性和阴性症状的有害和有益影响,分别。纵向设计需要了解大麻的作用是这种关联。报告的效应大小较小,CI较宽,对调查结果的解释应谨慎。
    这项研究没有获得任何具体的资助或资助。作者的主要财政支持由LeVinatier精神病医院提供。
    UNASSIGNED: The association between cannabis use and positive symptoms in schizophrenia spectrum disorders is well documented, especially via meta-analyses. Yet, findings are inconsistent regarding negative symptoms, while other dimensions such as disorganization, depression, and excitement, have not been investigated. In addition, meta-analyses use aggregated data discarding important confounding variables which is a source of bias.
    UNASSIGNED: PubMed, ScienceDirect and PsycINFO were used to search for publications from inception to September 27, 2022. We contacted the authors of relevant studies to extract raw datasets and perform an Individual Participant Data meta-analysis (IPDMA). Inclusion criteria were: psychopathology of individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders assessed by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS); cannabis-users had to either have a diagnosis of cannabis use disorder or use cannabis at least twice a week. The main outcomes were the PANSS subscores extracted via the 3-factor (positive, negative and general) and 5-factor (positive, negative, disorganization, depression, excitement) structures. Preregistration is accessible via Prospero: ID CRD42022329172.
    UNASSIGNED: Among the 1149 identified studies, 65 were eligible and 21 datasets were shared, totaling 3677 IPD and 3053 complete cases. The adjusted multivariate analysis revealed that relative to non-use, cannabis use was associated with higher severity of positive dimension (3-factor: Adjusted Mean Difference, aMD = 0.34, 95% Confidence Interval, CI = [0.03; 0.66]; 5-factor: aMD = 0.38, 95% CI = [0.08; 0.63]), lower severity of negative dimension (3-factor: aMD = -0.49, 95% CI [-0.90; -0.09]; 5-factor: aMD = -0.50, 95% CI = [-0.91; -0.08]), higher severity of excitement dimension (aMD = 0.16, 95% CI = [0.03; 0.28]). No association was found between cannabis use and disorganization (aMD = -0.13, 95% CI = [-0.42; 0.17]) or depression (aMD = -0.14, 95% CI = [-0.34; 0.06]).
    UNASSIGNED: No causal relationship can be inferred from the current results. The findings could be in favor of both a detrimental and beneficial effect of cannabis on positive and negative symptoms, respectively. Longitudinal designs are needed to understand the role of cannabis is this association. The reported effect sizes are small and CIs are wide, the interpretation of findings should be taken with caution.
    UNASSIGNED: This research did not receive any specific grant or funding. Primary financial support for authors was provided by Le Vinatier Psychiatric Hospital.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号