Preventing confounding in observational studies in orthopedic trauma surgery through expert panels: a systematic review.

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery Pub Date : 2025-01-24 DOI:10.1007/s00068-024-02690-w
Rolf H H Groenwold, L X van Rossenberg, D P J Smeeing, R M Houwert, J W Schoones, S P J Muijs, F C Oner, Y de Jong, B J M van de Wall
{"title":"Preventing confounding in observational studies in orthopedic trauma surgery through expert panels: a systematic review.","authors":"Rolf H H Groenwold, L X van Rossenberg, D P J Smeeing, R M Houwert, J W Schoones, S P J Muijs, F C Oner, Y de Jong, B J M van de Wall","doi":"10.1007/s00068-024-02690-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Confounding in observational studies can be mitigated by selecting only those patients, in whom equipoise of both treatments is secured by experts' disagreement over optimal therapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review to identify observational studies in the field of orthopedic trauma surgery that utilized expert panels for patient inclusion in order to limit the potential for confounding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four studies were identified that used expert panels to select participants based on expert disagreement. Derived from these studies and our own experience, recommendations were made regarding reporting of the size and composition of the expert panel, the information the expert panel receives, criteria for disagreement, selection of patients, and statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With this review we aim to provide insight into this study design and to stimulate discussions about the potential of expert panels to control for confounding in studies of medical treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":12064,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","volume":"51 1","pages":"36"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11762208/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-024-02690-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Confounding in observational studies can be mitigated by selecting only those patients, in whom equipoise of both treatments is secured by experts' disagreement over optimal therapy.

Methods: We conducted a systematic review to identify observational studies in the field of orthopedic trauma surgery that utilized expert panels for patient inclusion in order to limit the potential for confounding.

Results: Four studies were identified that used expert panels to select participants based on expert disagreement. Derived from these studies and our own experience, recommendations were made regarding reporting of the size and composition of the expert panel, the information the expert panel receives, criteria for disagreement, selection of patients, and statistical analysis.

Conclusion: With this review we aim to provide insight into this study design and to stimulate discussions about the potential of expert panels to control for confounding in studies of medical treatments.

Abstract Image

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
通过专家小组预防骨科创伤外科观察性研究中的混淆:一项系统综述。
目的:观察性研究中的混淆可以通过只选择那些患者来减轻,在这些患者中,专家对最佳治疗的分歧确保了两种治疗的平衡。方法:我们进行了一项系统综述,以确定骨科创伤外科领域的观察性研究,这些研究利用专家小组来纳入患者,以限制混淆的可能性。结果:确定了四项研究,使用专家小组来选择基于专家分歧的参与者。根据这些研究和我们自己的经验,我们对专家小组的规模和组成、专家小组收到的信息、分歧的标准、患者的选择和统计分析的报告提出了建议。结论:通过这篇综述,我们的目的是提供对这项研究设计的见解,并激发关于专家小组在医学治疗研究中控制混杂因素的潜力的讨论。
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
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
311
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery aims to open an interdisciplinary forum that allows for the scientific exchange between basic and clinical science related to pathophysiology, diagnostics and treatment of traumatized patients. The journal covers all aspects of clinical management, operative treatment and related research of traumatic injuries. Clinical and experimental papers on issues relevant for the improvement of trauma care are published. Reviews, original articles, short communications and letters allow the appropriate presentation of major and minor topics.
期刊最新文献
Examining the relationship between social deprivation index and pedestrian injuries in a suburban setting: Is that the only factor? Risk factors and long-term outcomes in anterior iliac and obturator hip dislocation. Noninvasive ventilation in chest trauma-related acute respiratory failure related to chest trauma: Efficacy and risk of pneumothorax. Scintigraphy for the diagnosis of primary unrecognised fractures in multiple trauma patients - a prospective, blinded, monocentric study. Evolving fracture management: the role of helical plating in orthopaedic trauma surgery - a narrative review.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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