Cargando…

Comprehensive review of statistical methods for analysing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) used as primary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published by the UK’s Health Technology Assessment (HTA) journal (1997–2020)

OBJECTIVES: To identify how frequently patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used as primary and/or secondary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and to summarise what statistical methods are used for the analysis of PROs. DESIGN: Comprehensive review. SETTING: RCTs funded and published b...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Qian, Yirui, Walters, Stephen J, Jacques, Richard, Flight, Laura
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8422492/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34489292
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051673
_version_ 1783749298048991232
author Qian, Yirui
Walters, Stephen J
Jacques, Richard
Flight, Laura
author_facet Qian, Yirui
Walters, Stephen J
Jacques, Richard
Flight, Laura
author_sort Qian, Yirui
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: To identify how frequently patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used as primary and/or secondary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and to summarise what statistical methods are used for the analysis of PROs. DESIGN: Comprehensive review. SETTING: RCTs funded and published by the United Kingdom’s (UK) National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme. DATA SOURCES AND ELIGIBILITY: HTA reports of RCTs published between January 1997 and December 2020 were reviewed. DATA EXTRACTION: Information relating to PRO use and analysis methods was extracted. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The frequency of using PROs as primary and/or secondary outcomes; statistical methods that were used for the analysis of PROs as primary outcomes. RESULTS: In this review, 37.6% (114/303) of trials used PROs as primary outcomes, and 82.8% (251/303) of trials used PROs as secondary outcomes from 303 NIHR HTA reports of RCTs. In the 114 RCTs where the PRO was the primary outcome, the most used PRO was the Short-Form 36 (8/114); the most popular methods for multivariable analysis were linear mixed model (45/114), linear regression (29/114) and analysis of covariance (13/114); logistic regression was applied for binary and ordinal outcomes in 14/114 trials; and the repeated measures analysis was used in 39/114 trials. CONCLUSION: The majority of trials used PROs as primary and/or secondary outcomes. Conventional methods such as linear regression are widely used, despite the potential violation of their assumptions. In recent years, there is an increasing trend of using complex models (eg, with mixed effects). Statistical methods developed to address these violations when analysing PROs, such as beta-binomial regression, are not routinely used in practice. Future research will focus on evaluating available statistical methods for the analysis of PROs.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8422492
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84224922021-09-22 Comprehensive review of statistical methods for analysing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) used as primary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published by the UK’s Health Technology Assessment (HTA) journal (1997–2020) Qian, Yirui Walters, Stephen J Jacques, Richard Flight, Laura BMJ Open Public Health OBJECTIVES: To identify how frequently patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are used as primary and/or secondary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and to summarise what statistical methods are used for the analysis of PROs. DESIGN: Comprehensive review. SETTING: RCTs funded and published by the United Kingdom’s (UK) National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Programme. DATA SOURCES AND ELIGIBILITY: HTA reports of RCTs published between January 1997 and December 2020 were reviewed. DATA EXTRACTION: Information relating to PRO use and analysis methods was extracted. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The frequency of using PROs as primary and/or secondary outcomes; statistical methods that were used for the analysis of PROs as primary outcomes. RESULTS: In this review, 37.6% (114/303) of trials used PROs as primary outcomes, and 82.8% (251/303) of trials used PROs as secondary outcomes from 303 NIHR HTA reports of RCTs. In the 114 RCTs where the PRO was the primary outcome, the most used PRO was the Short-Form 36 (8/114); the most popular methods for multivariable analysis were linear mixed model (45/114), linear regression (29/114) and analysis of covariance (13/114); logistic regression was applied for binary and ordinal outcomes in 14/114 trials; and the repeated measures analysis was used in 39/114 trials. CONCLUSION: The majority of trials used PROs as primary and/or secondary outcomes. Conventional methods such as linear regression are widely used, despite the potential violation of their assumptions. In recent years, there is an increasing trend of using complex models (eg, with mixed effects). Statistical methods developed to address these violations when analysing PROs, such as beta-binomial regression, are not routinely used in practice. Future research will focus on evaluating available statistical methods for the analysis of PROs. BMJ Publishing Group 2021-09-06 /pmc/articles/PMC8422492/ /pubmed/34489292 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051673 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits others to copy, redistribute, remix, transform and build upon this work for any purpose, provided the original work is properly cited, a link to the licence is given, and indication of whether changes were made. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Public Health
Qian, Yirui
Walters, Stephen J
Jacques, Richard
Flight, Laura
Comprehensive review of statistical methods for analysing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) used as primary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published by the UK’s Health Technology Assessment (HTA) journal (1997–2020)
title Comprehensive review of statistical methods for analysing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) used as primary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published by the UK’s Health Technology Assessment (HTA) journal (1997–2020)
title_full Comprehensive review of statistical methods for analysing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) used as primary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published by the UK’s Health Technology Assessment (HTA) journal (1997–2020)
title_fullStr Comprehensive review of statistical methods for analysing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) used as primary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published by the UK’s Health Technology Assessment (HTA) journal (1997–2020)
title_full_unstemmed Comprehensive review of statistical methods for analysing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) used as primary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published by the UK’s Health Technology Assessment (HTA) journal (1997–2020)
title_short Comprehensive review of statistical methods for analysing patient-reported outcomes (PROs) used as primary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published by the UK’s Health Technology Assessment (HTA) journal (1997–2020)
title_sort comprehensive review of statistical methods for analysing patient-reported outcomes (pros) used as primary outcomes in randomised controlled trials (rcts) published by the uk’s health technology assessment (hta) journal (1997–2020)
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8422492/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34489292
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-051673
work_keys_str_mv AT qianyirui comprehensivereviewofstatisticalmethodsforanalysingpatientreportedoutcomesprosusedasprimaryoutcomesinrandomisedcontrolledtrialsrctspublishedbytheukshealthtechnologyassessmenthtajournal19972020
AT waltersstephenj comprehensivereviewofstatisticalmethodsforanalysingpatientreportedoutcomesprosusedasprimaryoutcomesinrandomisedcontrolledtrialsrctspublishedbytheukshealthtechnologyassessmenthtajournal19972020
AT jacquesrichard comprehensivereviewofstatisticalmethodsforanalysingpatientreportedoutcomesprosusedasprimaryoutcomesinrandomisedcontrolledtrialsrctspublishedbytheukshealthtechnologyassessmenthtajournal19972020
AT flightlaura comprehensivereviewofstatisticalmethodsforanalysingpatientreportedoutcomesprosusedasprimaryoutcomesinrandomisedcontrolledtrialsrctspublishedbytheukshealthtechnologyassessmenthtajournal19972020