Analysis of temporal survival trends: considerations and best practice.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Medical Research Methodology Pub Date : 2025-02-22 DOI:10.1186/s12874-025-02505-5
Mikkel Runason Simonsen, Lars Klingen Gjærde, Lars Hernández Nielsen, Jan Brink Valentin, Rasmus Plenge Waagepetersen, Tarec Christoffer El-Galaly, Lasse Hjort Jakobsen
{"title":"Analysis of temporal survival trends: considerations and best practice.","authors":"Mikkel Runason Simonsen, Lars Klingen Gjærde, Lars Hernández Nielsen, Jan Brink Valentin, Rasmus Plenge Waagepetersen, Tarec Christoffer El-Galaly, Lasse Hjort Jakobsen","doi":"10.1186/s12874-025-02505-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Monitoring quality of healthcare is vital to ensure that changes made to clinical practice achieve the intended goals. Assessing temporal trends due to the accumulated effect of all changes in clinical practice in a given period is essential in quality monitoring. However, this assesment is compplicated by the fact that numerous of changes might occour over time unrelated to the clinical practice. Furthermore, the methods used to assess temporal trends in patient outcomes in the medical literature are heterogeneous, making it difficult to compare results between studies. In this paper, we describe methods that enable researchers to investigate temporal trends in survival data and we discuss their pros and cons. Numerous unrelated changes may occur over time which must be taken into account and disentangled when assessing the improvement in clinical management. The methods and interpretation thereof are exemplified on patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma from the Danish lymphoma registry.</p>","PeriodicalId":9114,"journal":{"name":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","volume":"25 1","pages":"51"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11847396/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Medical Research Methodology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-025-02505-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Monitoring quality of healthcare is vital to ensure that changes made to clinical practice achieve the intended goals. Assessing temporal trends due to the accumulated effect of all changes in clinical practice in a given period is essential in quality monitoring. However, this assesment is compplicated by the fact that numerous of changes might occour over time unrelated to the clinical practice. Furthermore, the methods used to assess temporal trends in patient outcomes in the medical literature are heterogeneous, making it difficult to compare results between studies. In this paper, we describe methods that enable researchers to investigate temporal trends in survival data and we discuss their pros and cons. Numerous unrelated changes may occur over time which must be taken into account and disentangled when assessing the improvement in clinical management. The methods and interpretation thereof are exemplified on patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma from the Danish lymphoma registry.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
时间生存趋势分析:考虑因素和最佳实践。
监测医疗保健质量对于确保临床实践所做的更改实现预期目标至关重要。在一定时期内,由于临床实践中所有变化的累积效应,评估时间趋势对质量监测至关重要。然而,随着时间的推移,与临床实践无关的许多变化可能会发生,这一事实使评估变得复杂。此外,医学文献中用于评估患者预后的时间趋势的方法各不相同,因此难以比较研究之间的结果。在本文中,我们描述了使研究人员能够调查生存数据的时间趋势的方法,并讨论了它们的优点和缺点。随着时间的推移,许多不相关的变化可能会发生,在评估临床管理的改进时必须考虑和解决这些变化。方法和解释的例子是来自丹麦淋巴瘤登记处的弥漫性大b细胞淋巴瘤患者。
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
BMC Medical Research Methodology
BMC Medical Research Methodology 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
2.50%
发文量
298
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Medical Research Methodology is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in methodological approaches to healthcare research. Articles on the methodology of epidemiological research, clinical trials and meta-analysis/systematic review are particularly encouraged, as are empirical studies of the associations between choice of methodology and study outcomes. BMC Medical Research Methodology does not aim to publish articles describing scientific methods or techniques: these should be directed to the BMC journal covering the relevant biomedical subject area.
期刊最新文献
Sensitivity analysis in Bayesian clinical trials was underused and poorly reported: a systematic survey. Correction: Performance of several types of beta-binomial models in comparison to standard approaches for meta-analyses with very few studies. Enhancing rare disease guideline development with real-world data: a method evaluation. Simulation-based assessment of a Bayesian M-spline survival model with flexible baseline hazard and time-dependent effects. Bibliometric, methodological and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews with explicit AI disclosure statements: an exploratory meta-research study.
×
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: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