Cargando…

Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials–A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence

AIM: To conduct a survey of current meta-epidemiological studies to identify additional trial design characteristics that may be associated with significant over- or underestimation of the treatment effect and to use such identified characteristics as a basis for the formulation of new CQS appraisal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mickenautsch, Steffen, Rupf, Stefan, Miletić, Ivana, Yengopal, Veerasamy
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9803107/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36584067
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279645
_version_ 1784861805058719744
author Mickenautsch, Steffen
Rupf, Stefan
Miletić, Ivana
Yengopal, Veerasamy
author_facet Mickenautsch, Steffen
Rupf, Stefan
Miletić, Ivana
Yengopal, Veerasamy
author_sort Mickenautsch, Steffen
collection PubMed
description AIM: To conduct a survey of current meta-epidemiological studies to identify additional trial design characteristics that may be associated with significant over- or underestimation of the treatment effect and to use such identified characteristics as a basis for the formulation of new CQS appraisal criteria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrieved eligible studies from two systematic reviews on this topic (latest search May 2015) and searched the databases PubMed and Embase for further studies from June 2015 –March 2022. All data were extracted by one author and verified by another. Sufficiently homogeneous estimates from single studies were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Trial design characteristics associated with statistically significant estimates from single datasets (which could not be pooled) and meta-analyses were used as a basis to formulate new or amend existing CQS criteria. RESULTS: A total of 38 meta-epidemiological studies were identified. From these, seven trial design characteristics associated with statistically significant over- or underestimation of the true therapeutic effect were found. CONCLUSION: One new criterion concerning double-blinding was added to the CQS, and the original criteria for concealing the random allocation sequence and for minimum sample size were amended.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9803107
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-98031072022-12-31 Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials–A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence Mickenautsch, Steffen Rupf, Stefan Miletić, Ivana Yengopal, Veerasamy PLoS One Research Article AIM: To conduct a survey of current meta-epidemiological studies to identify additional trial design characteristics that may be associated with significant over- or underestimation of the treatment effect and to use such identified characteristics as a basis for the formulation of new CQS appraisal criteria. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrieved eligible studies from two systematic reviews on this topic (latest search May 2015) and searched the databases PubMed and Embase for further studies from June 2015 –March 2022. All data were extracted by one author and verified by another. Sufficiently homogeneous estimates from single studies were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Trial design characteristics associated with statistically significant estimates from single datasets (which could not be pooled) and meta-analyses were used as a basis to formulate new or amend existing CQS criteria. RESULTS: A total of 38 meta-epidemiological studies were identified. From these, seven trial design characteristics associated with statistically significant over- or underestimation of the true therapeutic effect were found. CONCLUSION: One new criterion concerning double-blinding was added to the CQS, and the original criteria for concealing the random allocation sequence and for minimum sample size were amended. Public Library of Science 2022-12-30 /pmc/articles/PMC9803107/ /pubmed/36584067 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279645 Text en © 2022 Mickenautsch et al https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Mickenautsch, Steffen
Rupf, Stefan
Miletić, Ivana
Yengopal, Veerasamy
Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials–A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence
title Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials–A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence
title_full Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials–A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence
title_fullStr Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials–A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence
title_full_unstemmed Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials–A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence
title_short Extension of the Composite Quality Score (CQS) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials–A systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence
title_sort extension of the composite quality score (cqs) as an appraisal tool for prospective, controlled clinical therapy trials–a systematic review of meta-epidemiological evidence
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9803107/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36584067
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0279645
work_keys_str_mv AT mickenautschsteffen extensionofthecompositequalityscorecqsasanappraisaltoolforprospectivecontrolledclinicaltherapytrialsasystematicreviewofmetaepidemiologicalevidence
AT rupfstefan extensionofthecompositequalityscorecqsasanappraisaltoolforprospectivecontrolledclinicaltherapytrialsasystematicreviewofmetaepidemiologicalevidence
AT mileticivana extensionofthecompositequalityscorecqsasanappraisaltoolforprospectivecontrolledclinicaltherapytrialsasystematicreviewofmetaepidemiologicalevidence
AT yengopalveerasamy extensionofthecompositequalityscorecqsasanappraisaltoolforprospectivecontrolledclinicaltherapytrialsasystematicreviewofmetaepidemiologicalevidence