Pitfalls when comparing COVID-19-related outcomes across studies—lessons learnt from the ERACODA collaboration

Reported outcomes, such as incidence rates of mortality and intensive care unit admission, vary widely across epidemiological coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) studies, including in the nephrology field. This variation can in part be explained by differences in patient characteristics, but also me...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Noordzij, Marlies, Vart, Priya, Duivenvoorden, Raphaël, Franssen, Casper F M, Hemmelder, Marc H, Jager, Kitty J, Hilbrands, Luuk B, Gansevoort, Ron T
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2021
Materias:
CKJ Reviews
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7929019/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33796283
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ckj/sfab027
Descripción
Sumario:Reported outcomes, such as incidence rates of mortality and intensive care unit admission, vary widely across epidemiological coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) studies, including in the nephrology field. This variation can in part be explained by differences in patient characteristics, but also methodological aspects must be considered. In this review, we reflect on the methodological factors that contribute to the observed variation in COVID-19-related outcomes and their risk factors that are identified in the various studies. We focus on issues that arose during the design and analysis phase of the European Renal Association COVID-19 Database (ERACODA), and use examples from recently published reports on COVID-19 to illustrate these issues.

Ejemplares similares