Jiayue Xu, Qiao He, Mingqi Wang, Mei Liu, Qianrui Li, Yan Ren, Minghong Yao, Guowei Li, Kevin Lu, Kang Zou, Wen Wang, Xin Sun
{"title":"在观察性研究中处理时变治疗:范围界定审查和建议","authors":"Jiayue Xu, Qiao He, Mingqi Wang, Mei Liu, Qianrui Li, Yan Ren, Minghong Yao, Guowei Li, Kevin Lu, Kang Zou, Wen Wang, Xin Sun","doi":"10.1111/jebm.12600","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objective</h3>\n \n <p>Time-varying treatments are common in observational studies. However, when assessing treatment effects, the methodological framework has not been systematically established for handling time-varying treatments. This study aimed to examine the current methods for dealing with time-varying treatments in observational studies and developed practical recommendations.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We searched PubMed from 2000 to 2021 for methodological articles about time-varying treatments, and qualitatively summarized the current methods for handling time-varying treatments. Subsequently, we developed practical recommendations through interactive internal group discussions and consensus by a panel of external experts.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Of the 36 eligible reports (22 methodological reviews, 10 original studies, 2 tutorials and 2 commentaries), most examined statistical methods for time-varying treatments, and only a few discussed the overarching methodological process. Generally, there were three methodological components to handle time-varying treatments. These included the specification of treatment which may be categorized as three scenarios (i.e., time-independent treatment, static treatment regime, or dynamic treatment regime); definition of treatment status which could involve three approaches (i.e., intention-to-treat, per-protocol, or as-treated approach); and selection of analytic methods. Based on the review results, a methodological workflow and a set of practical recommendations were proposed through two consensus meetings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>There is no consensus process for assessing treatment effects in observational studies with time-varying treatments. Previous efforts were dedicated to developing statistical methods. Our study proposed a stepwise workflow with practical recommendations to assist the practice.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":16090,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","volume":"17 1","pages":"95-105"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Handling time-varying treatments in observational studies: A scoping review and recommendations\",\"authors\":\"Jiayue Xu, Qiao He, Mingqi Wang, Mei Liu, Qianrui Li, Yan Ren, Minghong Yao, Guowei Li, Kevin Lu, Kang Zou, Wen Wang, Xin Sun\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jebm.12600\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objective</h3>\\n \\n <p>Time-varying treatments are common in observational studies. However, when assessing treatment effects, the methodological framework has not been systematically established for handling time-varying treatments. This study aimed to examine the current methods for dealing with time-varying treatments in observational studies and developed practical recommendations.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We searched PubMed from 2000 to 2021 for methodological articles about time-varying treatments, and qualitatively summarized the current methods for handling time-varying treatments. Subsequently, we developed practical recommendations through interactive internal group discussions and consensus by a panel of external experts.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Of the 36 eligible reports (22 methodological reviews, 10 original studies, 2 tutorials and 2 commentaries), most examined statistical methods for time-varying treatments, and only a few discussed the overarching methodological process. Generally, there were three methodological components to handle time-varying treatments. These included the specification of treatment which may be categorized as three scenarios (i.e., time-independent treatment, static treatment regime, or dynamic treatment regime); definition of treatment status which could involve three approaches (i.e., intention-to-treat, per-protocol, or as-treated approach); and selection of analytic methods. Based on the review results, a methodological workflow and a set of practical recommendations were proposed through two consensus meetings.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>There is no consensus process for assessing treatment effects in observational studies with time-varying treatments. Previous efforts were dedicated to developing statistical methods. Our study proposed a stepwise workflow with practical recommendations to assist the practice.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16090,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"95-105\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jebm.12600\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Evidence‐Based Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jebm.12600","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Handling time-varying treatments in observational studies: A scoping review and recommendations
Objective
Time-varying treatments are common in observational studies. However, when assessing treatment effects, the methodological framework has not been systematically established for handling time-varying treatments. This study aimed to examine the current methods for dealing with time-varying treatments in observational studies and developed practical recommendations.
Methods
We searched PubMed from 2000 to 2021 for methodological articles about time-varying treatments, and qualitatively summarized the current methods for handling time-varying treatments. Subsequently, we developed practical recommendations through interactive internal group discussions and consensus by a panel of external experts.
Results
Of the 36 eligible reports (22 methodological reviews, 10 original studies, 2 tutorials and 2 commentaries), most examined statistical methods for time-varying treatments, and only a few discussed the overarching methodological process. Generally, there were three methodological components to handle time-varying treatments. These included the specification of treatment which may be categorized as three scenarios (i.e., time-independent treatment, static treatment regime, or dynamic treatment regime); definition of treatment status which could involve three approaches (i.e., intention-to-treat, per-protocol, or as-treated approach); and selection of analytic methods. Based on the review results, a methodological workflow and a set of practical recommendations were proposed through two consensus meetings.
Conclusions
There is no consensus process for assessing treatment effects in observational studies with time-varying treatments. Previous efforts were dedicated to developing statistical methods. Our study proposed a stepwise workflow with practical recommendations to assist the practice.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Evidence-Based Medicine (EMB) is an esteemed international healthcare and medical decision-making journal, dedicated to publishing groundbreaking research outcomes in evidence-based decision-making, research, practice, and education. Serving as the official English-language journal of the Cochrane China Centre and West China Hospital of Sichuan University, we eagerly welcome editorials, commentaries, and systematic reviews encompassing various topics such as clinical trials, policy, drug and patient safety, education, and knowledge translation.