在复杂的干预网络中对过渡性假设的认识较低:从721个网络元分析中进行的系统调查
Loukia M Spineli1, Chrysostomos Kalyvas2, Juan Jose Yepes-Nuñez3,4
1Midwifery Research and Education Unit (OE 9210), Hannover Medical School, Carl-Neuberg-Straße 1, 30625, Hannover, Germany. Spineli.Loukia@mh-hannover.de.
BMC medicine
|March 13, 2024
概括
在网络元分析 (NMA) 中报告和评估过渡性略有改善了PRISMA-NMA后的指导方针. 然而,过渡性的预先规划和概念评估需要更多的注意力来进行可靠的间接治疗效应估计.
科学领域:
- 健康研究中的方法论.
- 生物统计学 生物统计学
- 证据综合 证据综合
背景情况:
- 过渡性假设对于网络元分析 (NMA) 的有效性至关重要.
- 违反过渡性可能会破坏间接治疗效应估计的可信性.
- 本研究以实证的方式评估了多项干预的系统性审查中传递性的报告和评估.
研究的目的:
- 在纳入NMA的系统审查中评估报告的完整性和过渡性评估.
- 为了比较PRISMA-NMA声明发布前后的报告和评估实践.
主要方法:
- 使用实用方法来更新先前研究的证据基础.
- 通过NMA (2011-2015年) 选了361项系统审查和360项审查 (2016-2021年).
- 制定和应用了对过渡性报告和评估的评估标准.
主要成果:
- 在PRISMA-NMA之后发布的评论更有可能有协议,计划前的过渡性评估和报告结果.
- 然而,PRISMA-NMA后的审查不太可能定义过渡性或讨论其影响.
- 统计评估,特别是一致性,比概念评估更常见;试验的可比性是关键的理由.
结论:
- PRISMA-NMA声明导致了报告和评估过渡性的微小改进.
- 过渡性预先规划和概念评估仍然是需要改进的领域.
- 需要进一步关注评估过渡性假设时的方法严格性.
相关概念视频
Causality in Epidemiology
409
Causality or causation is a fundamental concept in epidemiology, vital for understanding the relationships between various factors and health outcomes. Despite its importance, there's no single, universally accepted definition of causality within the discipline. Drawing from a systematic review, causality in epidemiology encompasses several definitions, including production, necessary and sufficient, sufficient-component, counterfactual, and probabilistic models. Each has its strengths and...
409
Cause and Effect
10.9K
While variables are sometimes correlated because one does cause the other, it could also be that some other factor, a confounding variable, is actually causing the systematic movement in our variables of interest. For instance, as sales in ice cream increase, so does the overall rate of crime. Is it possible that indulging in your favorite flavor of ice cream could send you on a crime spree? Or, after committing crime do you think you might decide to treat yourself to a cone?
10.9K
Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
99
Confounding is a critical issue in epidemiological studies, often leading to misleading conclusions about associations between exposures and outcomes. It occurs when the relationship between the exposure and the outcome is mixed with the effects of other factors that influence the outcome. Given that, addressing confounding is of high importance for drawing accurate inferences in research.
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
99
Relationship Formation
40.0K
What do you think is the single most influential factor in determining with whom you become friends and whom you form romantic relationships? You might be surprised to learn that the answer is simple: the people with whom you have the most contact. This most important factor is proximity. You are more likely to be friends with people you have regular contact with. For example, there are decades of research that shows that you are more likely to become friends with people who live in your dorm,...
40.0K
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
307
The Bradford Hill criteria serve as guidelines for establishing causative links in epidemiological research. Beyond Strength, Consistency, Specificity, and Temporality, key criteria also include Biological Gradient, Plausibility, Coherence, Experiment, and Analogy. These principles assist scientists in assessing the likelihood of causation in complex biological contexts. Below is a summary of these concepts:
307
Confounding in Epidemiological Studies
169
Confounding in statistical epidemiology represents a pivotal challenge, referring to the distortion in the perceived relationship between an exposure and an outcome due to the presence of a third variable, known as a confounder. This variable is associated with both the exposure and the outcome but is not a direct link in their causal chain. Its presence can lead to erroneous interpretations of the exposure's effect, either exaggerating or underestimating the true association. This...
169


