Cargando…
Inadequate Reporting of Cointerventions, Other Methodological Factors, and Treatment Estimates in Cardiovascular Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study
OBJECTIVE: To assess how inadequate reporting of cointerventions influences estimated treatment effects in recent cardiovascular trials. METHODS: Medline/Embase were systematically searched from January 1, 2011 to July 1, 2021 for trials evaluating pharmacologic interventions on clinical cardiovascu...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10250579/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37304064 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2023.04.010 |
_version_ | 1785055780740792320 |
---|---|
author | Bührer, Jonas Del Giovane, Cinzia Gencer, Baris Adam, Luise Lyko, Christina Feller, Martin Da Costa, Bruno R. Aujesky, Drahomir Bauer, Douglas C. Rodondi, Nicolas Moutzouri, Elisavet |
author_facet | Bührer, Jonas Del Giovane, Cinzia Gencer, Baris Adam, Luise Lyko, Christina Feller, Martin Da Costa, Bruno R. Aujesky, Drahomir Bauer, Douglas C. Rodondi, Nicolas Moutzouri, Elisavet |
author_sort | Bührer, Jonas |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To assess how inadequate reporting of cointerventions influences estimated treatment effects in recent cardiovascular trials. METHODS: Medline/Embase were systematically searched from January 1, 2011 to July 1, 2021 for trials evaluating pharmacologic interventions on clinical cardiovascular outcomes published in 5 high-impact journals. Information on adequate vs inadequate reporting of cointerventions, blinding, risk of bias due to deviations of intended interventions (low vs high/some concerns), funding (nonindustry vs industry), design (superiority vs noninferiority), and results were assessed by 2 reviewers. The association with effect sizes was assessed using meta-regression random-effect analysis, expressed as ratios of odds ratios (ROR). RORs of >1.0 indicated that trials with the methodological factor pointing to lower quality report larger treatment estimates. RESULTS: In total, 164 trials were included. Of the 164 trials, 124 (74%) did not adequately report cointerventions; 89 of the 164 trials (54%) provided no information regarding cointerventions, and 70 of the 164 (43%) were at risk of bias due to inadequate blinding. Moreover, 86 of the 164 (53%) were at risk of bias due to deviation of intended interventions. Of the 164 trials, 144 (88%) were funded by the industries. Trials with inadequate reporting of cointerventions had larger treatment estimates for the primary end point (ROR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.15; I(2)=0%). No significant association with results for blinding (ROR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.91-1.03; I(2)=66%), deviation of intended interventions (ROR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.92-1.04; I(2)=0%), or funding (ROR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93-1.09; I(2)=0%) was found. CONCLUSION: We conclude that trials with inadequate reporting of cointerventions showed larger treatment effect estimates, potentially indicating overestimation of therapeutic benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero Identifier: CRD42017072522: |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10250579 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102505792023-06-10 Inadequate Reporting of Cointerventions, Other Methodological Factors, and Treatment Estimates in Cardiovascular Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study Bührer, Jonas Del Giovane, Cinzia Gencer, Baris Adam, Luise Lyko, Christina Feller, Martin Da Costa, Bruno R. Aujesky, Drahomir Bauer, Douglas C. Rodondi, Nicolas Moutzouri, Elisavet Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes Original Article OBJECTIVE: To assess how inadequate reporting of cointerventions influences estimated treatment effects in recent cardiovascular trials. METHODS: Medline/Embase were systematically searched from January 1, 2011 to July 1, 2021 for trials evaluating pharmacologic interventions on clinical cardiovascular outcomes published in 5 high-impact journals. Information on adequate vs inadequate reporting of cointerventions, blinding, risk of bias due to deviations of intended interventions (low vs high/some concerns), funding (nonindustry vs industry), design (superiority vs noninferiority), and results were assessed by 2 reviewers. The association with effect sizes was assessed using meta-regression random-effect analysis, expressed as ratios of odds ratios (ROR). RORs of >1.0 indicated that trials with the methodological factor pointing to lower quality report larger treatment estimates. RESULTS: In total, 164 trials were included. Of the 164 trials, 124 (74%) did not adequately report cointerventions; 89 of the 164 trials (54%) provided no information regarding cointerventions, and 70 of the 164 (43%) were at risk of bias due to inadequate blinding. Moreover, 86 of the 164 (53%) were at risk of bias due to deviation of intended interventions. Of the 164 trials, 144 (88%) were funded by the industries. Trials with inadequate reporting of cointerventions had larger treatment estimates for the primary end point (ROR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.01-1.15; I(2)=0%). No significant association with results for blinding (ROR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.91-1.03; I(2)=66%), deviation of intended interventions (ROR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.92-1.04; I(2)=0%), or funding (ROR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93-1.09; I(2)=0%) was found. CONCLUSION: We conclude that trials with inadequate reporting of cointerventions showed larger treatment effect estimates, potentially indicating overestimation of therapeutic benefit. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero Identifier: CRD42017072522: Elsevier 2023-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10250579/ /pubmed/37304064 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2023.04.010 Text en © 2023 The Authors https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Bührer, Jonas Del Giovane, Cinzia Gencer, Baris Adam, Luise Lyko, Christina Feller, Martin Da Costa, Bruno R. Aujesky, Drahomir Bauer, Douglas C. Rodondi, Nicolas Moutzouri, Elisavet Inadequate Reporting of Cointerventions, Other Methodological Factors, and Treatment Estimates in Cardiovascular Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study |
title | Inadequate Reporting of Cointerventions, Other Methodological Factors, and Treatment Estimates in Cardiovascular Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study |
title_full | Inadequate Reporting of Cointerventions, Other Methodological Factors, and Treatment Estimates in Cardiovascular Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study |
title_fullStr | Inadequate Reporting of Cointerventions, Other Methodological Factors, and Treatment Estimates in Cardiovascular Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Inadequate Reporting of Cointerventions, Other Methodological Factors, and Treatment Estimates in Cardiovascular Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study |
title_short | Inadequate Reporting of Cointerventions, Other Methodological Factors, and Treatment Estimates in Cardiovascular Trials: A Meta-Epidemiological Study |
title_sort | inadequate reporting of cointerventions, other methodological factors, and treatment estimates in cardiovascular trials: a meta-epidemiological study |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10250579/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37304064 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocpiqo.2023.04.010 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT buhrerjonas inadequatereportingofcointerventionsothermethodologicalfactorsandtreatmentestimatesincardiovasculartrialsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT delgiovanecinzia inadequatereportingofcointerventionsothermethodologicalfactorsandtreatmentestimatesincardiovasculartrialsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT gencerbaris inadequatereportingofcointerventionsothermethodologicalfactorsandtreatmentestimatesincardiovasculartrialsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT adamluise inadequatereportingofcointerventionsothermethodologicalfactorsandtreatmentestimatesincardiovasculartrialsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT lykochristina inadequatereportingofcointerventionsothermethodologicalfactorsandtreatmentestimatesincardiovasculartrialsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT fellermartin inadequatereportingofcointerventionsothermethodologicalfactorsandtreatmentestimatesincardiovasculartrialsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT dacostabrunor inadequatereportingofcointerventionsothermethodologicalfactorsandtreatmentestimatesincardiovasculartrialsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT aujeskydrahomir inadequatereportingofcointerventionsothermethodologicalfactorsandtreatmentestimatesincardiovasculartrialsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT bauerdouglasc inadequatereportingofcointerventionsothermethodologicalfactorsandtreatmentestimatesincardiovasculartrialsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT rodondinicolas inadequatereportingofcointerventionsothermethodologicalfactorsandtreatmentestimatesincardiovasculartrialsametaepidemiologicalstudy AT moutzourielisavet inadequatereportingofcointerventionsothermethodologicalfactorsandtreatmentestimatesincardiovasculartrialsametaepidemiologicalstudy |