scholarly journals European COMPARative Effectiveness research on blended Depression treatment versus treatment-as-usual (E-COMPARED): study protocol for a randomized controlled, non-inferiority trial in eight European countries

Trials ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Annet Kleiboer ◽  
Jan Smit ◽  
Judith Bosmans ◽  
Jeroen Ruwaard ◽  
Gerhard Andersson ◽  
...  
2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (34) ◽  
pp. 4194-4201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olwen M. Hahn ◽  
Richard L. Schilsky

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) has been promoted as a way to improve the translation gap between clinical research and everyday clinical practice as well as to deliver more cost-effective health care. CER will account for a significant portion of funding allocated by the US government for health care research. Oncology has a rich history of improving clinical outcomes and advancing research through randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In this article, we review the role of RCTs in achieving the goals of CER, with particular emphasis on the role of publicly funded clinical trials.


2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexis A Krumme ◽  
Ajinkya Pawar ◽  
Sebastian Schneeweiss ◽  
Robert J Glynn ◽  
Niteesh K Choudhry ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 603-614
Author(s):  
Victoria Allan ◽  
Sreeram V Ramagopalan ◽  
Jack Mardekian ◽  
Aaron Jenkins ◽  
Xiaoyan Li ◽  
...  

After decades of warfarin being the only oral anticoagulant (OAC) widely available for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, four direct OACs (apixaban, dabigatran, edoxaban and rivaroxaban) were approved after demonstrating noninferior efficacy and safety versus warfarin in randomized controlled trials. Comparative effectiveness research of OACs based on real-world data provides complementary information to randomized controlled trials. Propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting are increasingly popular methods used to address confounding by indication potentially arising in comparative effectiveness research due to a lack of randomization in treatment assignment. This review describes the fundamentals of propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting, appraises differences between them and presents applied examples to elevate understanding of these methods within the atrial fibrillation field.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document