Four alternative methodologies for simulated treatment comparison: How could the use of simulation be re-invigorated?

IF 5 2区 生物学 Q1 MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2023-12-17 DOI:10.1002/jrsm.1681
Landan Zhang, Sylwia Bujkiewicz, Dan Jackson
{"title":"Four alternative methodologies for simulated treatment comparison: How could the use of simulation be re-invigorated?","authors":"Landan Zhang,&nbsp;Sylwia Bujkiewicz,&nbsp;Dan Jackson","doi":"10.1002/jrsm.1681","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Simulated treatment comparison (STC) is an established method for performing population adjustment for the indirect comparison of two treatments, where individual patient data (IPD) are available for one trial but only aggregate level information is available for the other. The most commonly used method is what we call ‘standard STC’. Here we fit an outcome model using data from the trial with IPD, and then substitute mean covariate values from the trial where only aggregate level data are available, to predict what the first of these trial's outcomes would have been if its population had been the same as the second. However, this type of STC methodology does not involve simulation and can result in bias when the link function used in the outcome model is non-linear. An alternative approach is to use the fitted outcome model to simulate patient profiles in the trial for which IPD are available, but in the other trial's population. This stochastic alternative presents additional challenges. We examine the history of STC and propose two new simulation-based methods that resolve many of the difficulties associated with the current stochastic approach. A virtue of the simulation-based STC methods is that the marginal estimands are then clearly targeted. We illustrate all methods using a numerical example and explore their use in a simulation study.</p>","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":"15 2","pages":"227-241"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Synthesis Methods","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jrsm.1681","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Simulated treatment comparison (STC) is an established method for performing population adjustment for the indirect comparison of two treatments, where individual patient data (IPD) are available for one trial but only aggregate level information is available for the other. The most commonly used method is what we call ‘standard STC’. Here we fit an outcome model using data from the trial with IPD, and then substitute mean covariate values from the trial where only aggregate level data are available, to predict what the first of these trial's outcomes would have been if its population had been the same as the second. However, this type of STC methodology does not involve simulation and can result in bias when the link function used in the outcome model is non-linear. An alternative approach is to use the fitted outcome model to simulate patient profiles in the trial for which IPD are available, but in the other trial's population. This stochastic alternative presents additional challenges. We examine the history of STC and propose two new simulation-based methods that resolve many of the difficulties associated with the current stochastic approach. A virtue of the simulation-based STC methods is that the marginal estimands are then clearly targeted. We illustrate all methods using a numerical example and explore their use in a simulation study.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
模拟治疗比较的四种替代方法:如何重新激活模拟的使用?
模拟治疗比较(STC)是一种成熟的方法,用于对两种治疗方法的间接比较进行人群调整,其中一种试验可获得患者个体数据(IPD),而另一种试验只能获得总体水平的信息。最常用的方法就是我们所说的 "标准 STC"。在这里,我们使用有 IPD 的试验数据拟合一个结果模型,然后用只有总体水平数据的试验中的协变量平均值替代,以预测如果第一个试验的人群与第二个试验的人群相同,那么第一个试验的结果会是怎样。然而,这种 STC 方法并不涉及模拟,当结果模型中使用的链接函数是非线性时,可能会导致偏差。另一种方法是使用拟合结果模型模拟有 IPD 的试验中另一试验人群中的患者情况。这种随机替代方法带来了更多挑战。我们研究了 STC 的历史,并提出了两种基于模拟的新方法,解决了与当前随机方法相关的许多难题。基于模拟的 STC 方法的一个优点是边际估计值目标明确。我们用一个数值示例说明了所有方法,并探讨了这些方法在模拟研究中的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Research Synthesis Methods
Research Synthesis Methods MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGYMULTID-MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
CiteScore
16.90
自引率
3.10%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Research Synthesis Methods is a reputable, peer-reviewed journal that focuses on the development and dissemination of methods for conducting systematic research synthesis. Our aim is to advance the knowledge and application of research synthesis methods across various disciplines. Our journal provides a platform for the exchange of ideas and knowledge related to designing, conducting, analyzing, interpreting, reporting, and applying research synthesis. While research synthesis is commonly practiced in the health and social sciences, our journal also welcomes contributions from other fields to enrich the methodologies employed in research synthesis across scientific disciplines. By bridging different disciplines, we aim to foster collaboration and cross-fertilization of ideas, ultimately enhancing the quality and effectiveness of research synthesis methods. Whether you are a researcher, practitioner, or stakeholder involved in research synthesis, our journal strives to offer valuable insights and practical guidance for your work.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information A tutorial on aggregating evidence from conceptual replication studies using the product Bayes factor Evolving use of the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool in biomedical systematic reviews Exploring methodological approaches used in network meta-analysis of psychological interventions: A scoping review An evaluation of the performance of stopping rules in AI-aided screening for psychological meta-analytical research
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1