Clinical Epidemiology Flashcards

1
Q

Clinical Epidemiology

A

The study of the patterns, causes and effects of health and disease in patient populations and the relationships between exposures or treatments and health outcomes.

(bioscience= animals models, genes/cells.
clinical sciences= patients
epidemiology= populations
health services research= heath care systems)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What does clinical epidemiology do?

A

Seeks to answer clinical questions and to guide clinical decision making.

Uses epidemiological approaches applied to groups of individuals seen by health care providers.

Provides the foundation for evidence-based medicine.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What are its clinical applications?

A
  • research question
    -study population
    -exposure
    -outcome
    -bias/confounding
    -risk estimation
    -impact
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Types of research questions

A

Risk:
What factors are associated with increased risk of disease?

Screening/prevention:
What interventions prevent people getting a disease?
Will early detection change the course of the disease?

Prognosis:
What is the natural history of the disease?
What factors determine disease outcomes?

Treatment:
Which treatment is more effective?
What are the unintended consequences of treatment?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

How are study population groups defined?

A

Specific illness or disease
Symptoms/ disease characteristics
At risk population
Diagnostic procedure
Treatment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Clinical epi exposures

A

interventions (i.e prevention, screening)

patient characteristics (i.e age, ethnicity, clinical features)

treatments or procedures (i.e type, intensity, dose)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Outcome in clinical epi

A

mortality (i.e survival)
disease progression (i.e recurrence)
morbidity/ complications

Outcomes are usually more frequent in clinical epidemiology compared with population studies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Data sources in clinical epi

A

Patient registries
Electronic health records
Population health surveys
Routinely collected administrative data
Primary patient-level data collection (prospective or retrospective)

Data collection can be:
study specific (protocol driven)
routine (practice driven i.e hospital records)
combination (i.e clinical registry or patient cohort)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Bias in clinical studies

A

Selection bias
- study population differs from broader population who would receive intervention in terms of relationship between exposure and outcome (i.e self-selection of participants)

Information bias (measurement error, mis-classification)
- methods of measurement of outcome differ between groups (closer monitoring of one treatment group)

Confounding:
- factors associated with both exposure and outcome may distort the main effect if not taken into account.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Methods to control for bias

A

Randomisation: selection bias/confounding
Restricted sample: selection bias/confounding
Blinding: measurement bias
Matching: selection bias/ confounding
Stratification: selection bias/ confounding
Multivariate analysis: confounding
Sensitivity analyses: all potential biases

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Validity of clinical epi study findings

A

Internal validity
- Are the findings of the study correct?
- Depends on study design and appropriate analysis

External validity
- Are the findings generalisable to the broader population?
- Depends on study sample & setting

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Types of clinical epi study designs:

A

Observational (non-randomised) studies
- Case-control studies
- Cohort studies
- Ecological studies (aggregated population data)
- Cross-sectional

Randomised studies
- RCTs –> Gold standard (but not always feasible)

Meta-analyses
- Combining results of multiple similar studies

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Levels of clinical epi evidence

A

Meta-analysis RCTs
- All evidence from trials
- Combines data from multiple trials
Level: high

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs)
- Least biased: comparison groups should be equivalent (in all other ways) die to randomised assignment
Level: high

Meta-analyses of observational studies
- Combines data from multiple studies of same type
- Increases statistical power
Level: medium

Observational studies
(Cohort & Case-control)
- Data at the individual level on exposures and outcomes
- Biased if comparison groups differ in underlying risks that affect outcome
Level: medium

Observational studies (Ecological/trend analyses/cross-sectional)
- Data are at an aggregate level so findings may not translate to individuals
- Indicative rather than definitive
Level: low

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

RCTS

A

Patients are randomly assigned to one of two or more groups being offered different therapeutic measures

Chance alone indicated whether a particular patient will be assigned to a particular group

Patient outcomes in each group are monitored
- The occurrence of event(s) that the intervention seeks to prevent, and/or
-The occurrence of side effects/adverse effects

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Non-randomised (observational studies)

A

Treatment not assigned as part of study protocol but rather occurs as part of clinical practice

Observe outcomes (prospective or retrospective) following treatment

Observed alternative therapies may be the result of underlying differences between the groups that affect the chance of progression or complications (Bias)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Cohort study

A

May be retrospective or prospective

Participants selected based on exposure status (exposed and non-exposed)

Outcome does not occur prior to being part of the cohort

Followed up over time (longitudinal)

Time consuming and costly

Not efficient for rare outcomes

16
Q
A
17
Q

Case-control study

A

Study participants selected based on outcome

Some have outcome of interest (cases), some do not have outcome of interest (controls)

Exposure status is unknown at selection

Good for studying rare outcomes

18
Q

Cross-sectional study

A

Outcome and exposure(s) are measured at the same time

Participants are selected based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria set for the study

After the entry into the study, the participants are measured for outcome and exposure at the same time

Relatively quick and inexpensive

Can give us information about the prevalence of outcomes or exposures

Only one time measurement so must be careful when looking at causal associations

see slide 21 for comparison of observational studies

19
Q

Randomised trials VS observational studies

A

Advantages of RCTs:
Ensures that intervention is unrelated to the outcome
Comparison groups similar in all aspects other than the treatment/intervention
Can control for confounding by unknown factors

Disadvantages of RCTs:
Not always feasible/ethical to randomise
Often not timely
Not always generalisable due to restrictive eligibility criteria
Not designed to determine long term (rare) adverse effects

Advantages of observational studies
Feasibility: cheaper, convenient, timely
Better suited for rare outcomes and under-represented subgroups
May better reflect real world practice (effectiveness vs efficacy)

Disadvantages of observational studies
High risk of bias – treatment selection is based don clinical indications
Can only control for known measurable confounding factors

20
Q

Systematic reviews and meta-analysis

A

Provide the “highest level of evidence” for various clinical questions

Collates information from all available published data on a particular research topic/question

Meta-analysis – “a quantitative summary of the results if the results are judged sufficiently similar or consistent to support such synthesis” (Porta 2014)

Helps us to understand the quality of the articles in literature or the type of studies that have been conducted and published

21
Q

Example 1: studies of the natural history of illness

A

Measure health outcomes in ill persons who are not receiving a therapy that influences the presence or rate of these outcomes

Data from cohort studies are the major source of information on the natural history of a condition

22
Q
A
23
Q

Example 2: Studies of disease prognosis

A

Aim to predict a person’s risk of disease outcomes based on their clinical and non-clinical characteristics

Used to guide clinical decision making (i.e., suitability for treatment)

Cohort studies commonly used to develop prognostic tools

Usually assess multiple variables

Time to event analysis (i.e., death, disease progression)
- Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, Cox proportional hazards regression

24
Q

Example 3: Studies in disease prevention

A

Test an intervention that aims reduces the risk or severity of disease:
- Primary prevention – reduces disease occurrence
- Secondary prevention- earlier detection or treatment
- Tertiary prevention – reducing complications

Primary/secondary prevention offered to ‘population’

Need to evaluate: Effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness

Variety of study designs

25
Q

Example 4: Hormone Replacement Therapy for prevention of Coronary Heart Disease

A

Early observational studies showed reduced risk of CHD

Findings may be due to selection bias?
- Healthier women may be more likely to use HRT, less likely to develop CHD

RCTs to investigate potential of HRT chemo-prevention

RCTs no reduced risk, increased risk of CHD in 1st year

Why the contradictory results?

Debate about inferiority of observational methods

Results:
Differences mostly about timing of HRT use
How long after menopause women started HRT
Effect modification

Observational studies
- Compared current vs never users
- Women closer to menopausal age

RCT participants
- No prior HRT
- Older at enrolment (~63yr)

Reanalysis of data comparable groups
- Similar results
- No overall benefit of HRT for CHD risk
- Difference due to effect of timing or HRT

26
Q

Example 5: Studies of diagnostic and screening tests

A

Tests performed in persons with a symptom or sign of an illness are termed diagnostic

Tests done in those with no signs or symptoms are referred to as screening

Variety of study designs can be applied

27
Q

Mammography screening today

A

Screening technology is trial era was inferior to current day

Generalisability questionable outside of trial conditions

Relevance of mammography screening today given considerable advances/changes in BC treatment
There is therefore a potential role for observational studies in evaluating mammography

Advantages:
- Contemporary screening practice
- Real world setting

27
Q
A