scholarly journals Observational Studies Have a Critical Role to Play in Cancer Comparative Effectiveness Research

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (29) ◽  
pp. 2695-2696 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer R. Rider ◽  
Ludovic Trinquart
2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (34) ◽  
pp. 4208-4214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina Armstrong

Comparative effectiveness research (CER) seeks to assist consumers, clinicians, purchasers, and policy makers to make informed decisions to improve health care at both the individual and population levels. CER includes evidence generation and evidence synthesis. Randomized controlled trials are central to CER because of the lack of selection bias, with the recent development of adaptive and pragmatic trials increasing their relevance to real-world decision making. Observational studies comprise a growing proportion of CER because of their efficiency, generalizability to clinical practice, and ability to examine differences in effectiveness across patient subgroups. Concerns about selection bias in observational studies can be mitigated by measuring potential confounders and analytic approaches, including multivariable regression, propensity score analysis, and instrumental variable analysis. Evidence synthesis methods include systematic reviews and decision models. Systematic reviews are a major component of evidence-based medicine and can be adapted to CER by broadening the types of studies included and examining the full range of benefits and harms of alternative interventions. Decision models are particularly suited to CER, because they make quantitative estimates of expected outcomes based on data from a range of sources. These estimates can be tailored to patient characteristics and can include economic outcomes to assess cost effectiveness. The choice of method for CER is driven by the relative weight placed on concerns about selection bias and generalizability, as well as pragmatic concerns related to data availability and timing. Value of information methods can identify priority areas for investigation and inform research methods.


2020 ◽  
Vol 55 (3) ◽  
pp. 217-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth C. Lam ◽  
Cailee E. Welch Bacon ◽  
Eric L. Sauers ◽  
R. Curtis Bay

Context Recently, calls to conduct comparative effectiveness research (CER) in athletic training to better support patient care decisions have been circulated. Traditional research methods (eg, randomized controlled trials [RCTs], observational studies) may be ill suited for CER. Thus, innovative research methods are needed to support CER efforts. Objectives To discuss the limitations of traditional research designs in CER studies, describe a novel methodologic approach called the point-of-care clinical trial (POC-CT), and highlight components of the POC-CT (eg, incorporation of an electronic medical record [EMR], Bayesian adaptive feature) that allow investigators to conduct scientifically rigorous studies at the point of care. Description Practical concerns (eg, high costs and limited generalizability of RCTs, the inability to control for bias in observational studies) may stall CER efforts in athletic training. In short, the aim of the POC-CT is to embed a randomized pragmatic trial into routine care; thus, patients are randomized to minimize potential bias, but the study is conducted at the point of care to limit cost and improve the generalizability of the findings. Furthermore, the POC-CT uses an EMR to replace much of the infrastructure associated with a traditional RCT (eg, research team, patient and clinician reminders) and a Bayesian adaptive feature to help limit the number of patients needed for the study. Together, the EMR and Bayesian adaptive feature can improve the overall feasibility of the study and preserve the typical clinical experiences of the patient and clinician. Clinical Advantages The POC-CT includes the basic tenets of practice-based research because studies are conducted at the point of care, in real-life settings, and during routine clinical practice. If implemented effectively, the POC-CT can be seamlessly integrated into daily clinical practice, allowing investigators to establish patient-reported evidence that may be quickly applied to patient care decisions. This design appears to be a promising approach for CER investigations and may help establish a “learning health care system” in the sports medicine community.


2015 ◽  
Vol 30 (7) ◽  
pp. 1208-1217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sooraj Kuttykrishnan ◽  
Kamyar Kalantar-Zadeh ◽  
Onyebuchi A. Arah ◽  
Alfred K. Cheung ◽  
Steve Brunelli ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Sharon H. Giordano

Observational studies are increasingly being used for comparative effectiveness research. These studies can have the greatest impact when randomized trials are not feasible or when randomized studies have not included the population or outcomes of interest. However, careful attention must be paid to study design to minimize the likelihood of selection biases. Analytic techniques, such as multivariable regression modeling, propensity score analysis, and instrumental variable analysis, also can also be used to help address confounding. Oncology has many existing large and clinically rich observational databases that can be used for comparative effectiveness research. With careful study design, observational studies can produce valid results to assess the benefits and harms of a treatment or intervention in representative real-world populations.


2010 ◽  
Vol 29 (10) ◽  
pp. 1818-1825 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy A. Dreyer ◽  
Sean R. Tunis ◽  
Marc Berger ◽  
Dan Ollendorf ◽  
Pattra Mattox ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document