Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 30, 2026

Performing Data Mining And Integrative Analysis Of Biomarker in Breast Cancer Using Multiple Publicly Accessible Databases
Published on: May 17, 2019
Integrating multiple data sources (MUDS) for meta-analysis to improve patient-centered outcomes research: a protocol
Evan Mayo-Wilson1, Susan Hutfless2,3, Tianjing Li2
1Center for Clinical Trials and Evidence Synthesis, Department of Epidemiology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 North Wolfe Street, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. evan.mayo-wilson@jhu.edu.
Systematic reviews face challenges from selective reporting. This study develops methods to integrate multiple data sources for more reliable evidence on gabapentin and quetiapine effectiveness.
Area of Science:
- Clinical Medicine
- Evidence-Based Medicine
- Pharmacology
Background:
- Systematic reviews are crucial for decision-making but face credibility issues due to selective reporting of trial results.
- Incomplete publication of trials and selective reporting of outcomes undermine the reliability of systematic reviews.
- Lack of established methods for selecting among multiple data sources for the same trial complicates systematic review processes.
Purpose of the Study:
- To conduct systematic reviews on the effectiveness and safety of gabapentin for neuropathic pain and quetiapine for bipolar depression.
- To develop and apply methods for integrating diverse data sources, including published and unpublished trial data, into systematic reviews.
- To assess the impact of including multiple data sources on the results of systematic reviews and identify patient-centered outcomes.
Main Methods:
- Systematic reviews following Institute of Medicine guidelines for gabapentin and quetiapine.
- Highly sensitive electronic searches with dual independent reviewer assessment of results.
- Extraction and analysis of data from multiple sources, including published articles, conference abstracts, clinical study reports, and individual participant data, using meta-analysis.
Main Results:
- The study will compare results from meta-analyses using different data source combinations.
- Differences in the reporting of patient-centered outcomes across various data sources will be identified.
- The impact of integrating diverse data sources on the synthesized evidence will be evaluated.
Conclusions:
- Establishing robust methods for data synthesis is essential for enhancing the trustworthiness of systematic reviews.
- This research aims to provide a framework for more comprehensive and reliable evidence synthesis in medical research.
- The findings will contribute to improved decision-making for treatments like gabapentin and quetiapine.
Related Concept Videos
Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic...
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Patient-centered Care
Data Collection I
Analysis of Population Pharmacokinetic Data
Genomics
