Lecture 14- Review of the evidence Flashcards

1
Q

Epidemiological study designs

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

Evidence-based healthcare

A
  • Healthcare service and intervention should be based on best evidence
    • Need rigorous research
      • Primary e.g. RCT
      • Literature review of studies:
        • Narrative reviews
          • Implicit assumptions
          • Opaque
          • Methodology
          • Not reproducible biased, subjective
        • Systematic review
          • Explicit assumptions
          • Transparent methodology (e.g. search strategy)
          • Reproducible
          • Unbiased and objective
      • Decision analyses
        • Harm and benefits
        • Cost-effectiveness
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

systematic rveiw

A

an overview of primary studies that used explicit and reproducible methods

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

meta-analysis

A

a quantitative synthesis of the result of two or more primary studies that addressed the same hypothesis in the same way

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

why are systematic such a credible source of evidence

A
  • Clear focussed question
  • Explicit statements about:
    • types of study
    • types of participants
    • types of interventions
    • types of outcome measures
  • Systematic literature search
    • Methodology should be published
  • Selection of material
  • Appraisal
  • Synthesis (possibly including a metanalysis
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

purpose of a meta-analysis

A

To facilitate the synthesis of a large number of study results

  • Systematically collate study results
  • Reduce problems of interpretation due to variation in sampling
  • To quantify effect sizes and their uncertainty as a pooled estimate
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

quality criteria for meta-analysis

A

Should have a formal protocol (comprehensive search strategy and systematic method of reviewing each study for inclusion

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

Example – binary outcomes (e.g. dead or alive after certain time period)

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

Effect size calculated using Odds ratio

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

Forest plot study numbers 1-7 matches studies from previous example

A
  • Horizontal line= 95% confidence intervals
    • If it crosses 1- no significant difference in outcomes (5%)
  • Square= effect
  • Diamond= metanalyses estimates
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Interpretation of forest plot

A
  • Individual odds ratios [squares] with their 95% CI [lines] are displayed for each study
  • Size of square is in proportion to the weight given to the study
  • The [diamond] is the pooled estimate with the centre indicating the pooled odds ratio [dotted line] and the width representing the pooled 95% CI
  • The [solid line] is the null hypothesis OR
    • 1= no difference
  • 6 out of the 7 RCTs had an OR > 1.00 indicating greater odds for survival amongst patients taking aspirin after MI
  • Only 1 RCT (the largest) had a statistically significant result, but its OR was less than the other RCTs with an OR > 1.00
  • Pooled estimate OR = 1.11 (95% CI: 1.04 to 1.19) leads to the conclusion that aspirin increases the chance of surviving after a MI (p<0.05)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Meta-analysis problems

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

(1) Heterogeneity between studies : modelling for variation

Two approaches to calculating the pooled estimate odds ratio and its 95% Cl:

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

Heterogeneity

A

in meta-analysis refers to the variation in study outcomes between studies

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

fixed effect model

A

Assumes there is only one true effect that every study is trying to estimate- variation in effects is due random variation

  • Studies are weighted for uncertainty
  • Smaller confidence interval studies will have greater weight
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

random effect model

A

True mean effect= average of dashed vertical lines

  • Each individual study measures different treatment effect
  • Any difference between the true trial specific effect (dashed line) and study result is due to random error
17
Q

forest plot for same meta-analysis using fixed effect and random effects model

A

Difference: size of boxed= a little more equal in random effects model

  • Don’t want to let big study dominant weight
  • Want to see effect of smaller studies contributing more equally
18
Q

Example 2- Continuous outcome e.g. BP

A

Null value = 0 = no change in BP

  • Shows significant changes in systolic blood pressure (top of graph)
    • Diamond doesn’t cross 0
  • Insignificant change in diastolic bp (bottom of graph
    • Crosses 0
19
Q

Heterogeneity between studies: Analysing variation

A
  • Random effects modelling can only account for variation but not explain it
  • Sub-group analysis can help to explain heterogeneity which may provide further insight into the effect of a treatment or exposure
    • Study characteristics (e.g. year of publication, length of follow up, %female participants)
    • Participant profile – where data is analysed by types of participants (e.g. subgroups of males, females, adults, children)
20
Q

Variable quality of the studies: the issues

A
21
Q

Variable quality of the studies:the approaches

A

The approaches: 2 tend to be used

  • Define a basic quality standard and only include studies satisfying this criteria e.g. Cochrane reviews used to include only RCTs
    • Score each study for its quality and then
      • incorporate the quality score into the weighting allocated to each study during the modelling, so that higher quality studies have a greater influence on the pooled estimate
      • use sub-group analyses to explore differences, e.g. high quality studies vs. low quality studies
22
Q

Assessing the quality of the studies

A

For RCTs, many scales available – e.g. CHEERs

23
Q

Publication bias and selection of studies

A
  • Studies with statistically significant or ‘favourable’ results are more likely to be published than those studies with non- statistically significant or ‘unfavourable’ results
    • this applies particularly to smaller studies
  • Any systematic review or meta-analysis can be flawed by such bias
    • publication bias leads to a biased selection of studies towards demonstration of effect
24
Q

methods of identification

A
  • Check meta-analysis protocol for method of identification of studies
    • should include searching and identification of unpublished studies
  • Plot results of identified studies against a measure of their size (e.g. inverse of standard error), i.e. a Funnel Plot
  • Use a statistical test for publication bias – they tend to be weak statistical tests
25
Q

publication bias in selection of studies- funnel plots

A
  • Larger studies tend to have less standard error (will be found higher up on the X-axis)
  • Plots should look symmetrical
  • Look at evidence of bias plot
    • Gap in studies in left lower quad
      • Shows that smaller studies with odds ratio below 1 haven’t been published
26
Q

forest plot example 3

A

Forest Plots- The clinical value of thrombolysis remains uncertain- 1987

  • down the far left= trial
  • shows odds ratio- depending on how far over the plot is on the control/ treatment side of the plot
  • plots have confidence intervals (horizontal lines)
    • can make cumulative forest plots where data from different studies is synthesised- should decrease confidence limits
  • if the confidence limits pass over 1= not significant
  • if the confidence limits do not spread past 1, then the results are significant
  • meta-analyses will have narrower confidence interval (diamond)
    • the wider the diamond the wider the confidence intervals

Can be use to look at trial on a specific topic over a long period of time e.g. thrombolysis

Ethical- e.g. is it ethical to give control, ten years after it has been proven to be the favourable treatment

27
Q

Categorical variable

A

Categorical variables contain a finite number of categories or distinct groups. Categorical data might not have a logical order. For example, categorical predictors include gender, material type, and payment method.

e.g. dead or alive

28
Q

Continuous variable

A

Continuous variables are numeric variables that have an infinite number of values between any two values. A continuous variable can be numeric or date/time. For example, the length of a part or the date and time a payment is received.

e.g. blood pressure, height etc