探索败血症患者治疗效果的异质性:范围界定审查协议。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 ANESTHESIOLOGY Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Pub Date : 2024-07-08 DOI:10.1111/aas.14492
Lise Søndergaard, Anne Sofie Andreasen, Anders Perner, Carsten Niemann
{"title":"探索败血症患者治疗效果的异质性:范围界定审查协议。","authors":"Lise Søndergaard, Anne Sofie Andreasen, Anders Perner, Carsten Niemann","doi":"10.1111/aas.14492","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The average treatment effect (ATE) reported by most randomised clinical trials provides estimates of treatment effects for the theoretical, non-existent average patient. However, ATE may not accurately reflect the outcomes for all subsets of the trial population; some individuals may benefit from the intervention, while others experience worse outcomes or no effect at all. Heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) is the non-random and explainable variation in the magnitude or direction of a treatment effect among individuals within a population. Predictive approaches to HTE seek to provide estimates of which treatment of choice is better suited for the individual patient, using regression and/or machine learning techniques. This scoping review aims to investigate the extent to which such predictive approaches to HTE are applied to data from trials on sepsis or septic shock as well as the results of these analyses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The planned review will be conducted in accordance with the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. We will search Medline, EMBASE, Central, Cinahl and Google Scholar for studies on sepsis or septic shock in which HTE was analysed using predictive approaches. We plan to chart data regarding trial characteristics, patient demographics, disease severity, interventions, outcomes of interest and ATEs, type of predictive approach for the HTE analysis, results from HTE analysis and whether HTE analysis would change an ATE-based trial conclusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Studies included in the scoping review will be presented as narrative summaries, supplemented with descriptive statistics of quantitative data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The planned scoping review will systematically investigate, summarise and delineate the existing evidence of analysis of HTE in trials on sepsis or septic shock patients as well as their findings, when performed using predictive approaches.</p>","PeriodicalId":6909,"journal":{"name":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Exploring heterogeneity of treatment effect in patients with sepsis: Protocol for a scoping review.\",\"authors\":\"Lise Søndergaard, Anne Sofie Andreasen, Anders Perner, Carsten Niemann\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/aas.14492\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The average treatment effect (ATE) reported by most randomised clinical trials provides estimates of treatment effects for the theoretical, non-existent average patient. However, ATE may not accurately reflect the outcomes for all subsets of the trial population; some individuals may benefit from the intervention, while others experience worse outcomes or no effect at all. Heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) is the non-random and explainable variation in the magnitude or direction of a treatment effect among individuals within a population. Predictive approaches to HTE seek to provide estimates of which treatment of choice is better suited for the individual patient, using regression and/or machine learning techniques. This scoping review aims to investigate the extent to which such predictive approaches to HTE are applied to data from trials on sepsis or septic shock as well as the results of these analyses.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The planned review will be conducted in accordance with the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. We will search Medline, EMBASE, Central, Cinahl and Google Scholar for studies on sepsis or septic shock in which HTE was analysed using predictive approaches. We plan to chart data regarding trial characteristics, patient demographics, disease severity, interventions, outcomes of interest and ATEs, type of predictive approach for the HTE analysis, results from HTE analysis and whether HTE analysis would change an ATE-based trial conclusion.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Studies included in the scoping review will be presented as narrative summaries, supplemented with descriptive statistics of quantitative data.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The planned scoping review will systematically investigate, summarise and delineate the existing evidence of analysis of HTE in trials on sepsis or septic shock patients as well as their findings, when performed using predictive approaches.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":6909,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14492\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/aas.14492","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:大多数随机临床试验报告的平均治疗效果(ATE)是对理论上不存在的普通患者的治疗效果的估计。然而,平均治疗效果可能无法准确反映试验人群中所有子集的治疗效果;有些人可能从干预措施中受益,而另一些人的治疗效果较差或根本没有效果。治疗效果的异质性(HTE)是指人群中个体间治疗效果的大小或方向出现的非随机且可解释的变化。治疗效果异质性的预测方法旨在利用回归和/或机器学习技术,估算出哪种治疗方法更适合个体患者。本次范围界定综述旨在调查脓毒症或脓毒性休克试验数据在多大程度上应用了此类HTE预测方法,以及这些分析的结果:计划中的综述将按照范围界定综述的 PRISMA 扩展标准进行。我们将在 Medline、EMBASE、Central、Cinahl 和 Google Scholar 中搜索使用预测方法分析 HTE 的脓毒症或脓毒性休克研究。我们计划绘制有关试验特征、患者人口统计学、疾病严重程度、干预措施、相关结果和 ATE、HTE 分析预测方法类型、HTE 分析结果以及 HTE 分析是否会改变基于 ATE 的试验结论的数据图表:纳入范围界定综述的研究将以叙述性摘要的形式呈现,并辅以定量数据的描述性统计:计划中的范围界定综述将系统地调查、总结和界定脓毒症或脓毒性休克患者试验中 HTE 分析的现有证据,以及使用预测方法时的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Exploring heterogeneity of treatment effect in patients with sepsis: Protocol for a scoping review.

Background: The average treatment effect (ATE) reported by most randomised clinical trials provides estimates of treatment effects for the theoretical, non-existent average patient. However, ATE may not accurately reflect the outcomes for all subsets of the trial population; some individuals may benefit from the intervention, while others experience worse outcomes or no effect at all. Heterogeneity of treatment effect (HTE) is the non-random and explainable variation in the magnitude or direction of a treatment effect among individuals within a population. Predictive approaches to HTE seek to provide estimates of which treatment of choice is better suited for the individual patient, using regression and/or machine learning techniques. This scoping review aims to investigate the extent to which such predictive approaches to HTE are applied to data from trials on sepsis or septic shock as well as the results of these analyses.

Methods: The planned review will be conducted in accordance with the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. We will search Medline, EMBASE, Central, Cinahl and Google Scholar for studies on sepsis or septic shock in which HTE was analysed using predictive approaches. We plan to chart data regarding trial characteristics, patient demographics, disease severity, interventions, outcomes of interest and ATEs, type of predictive approach for the HTE analysis, results from HTE analysis and whether HTE analysis would change an ATE-based trial conclusion.

Results: Studies included in the scoping review will be presented as narrative summaries, supplemented with descriptive statistics of quantitative data.

Conclusion: The planned scoping review will systematically investigate, summarise and delineate the existing evidence of analysis of HTE in trials on sepsis or septic shock patients as well as their findings, when performed using predictive approaches.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica publishes papers on original work in the fields of anaesthesiology, intensive care, pain, emergency medicine, and subjects related to their basic sciences, on condition that they are contributed exclusively to this Journal. Case reports and short communications may be considered for publication if of particular interest; also letters to the Editor, especially if related to already published material. The editorial board is free to discuss the publication of reviews on current topics, the choice of which, however, is the prerogative of the board. Every effort will be made by the Editors and selected experts to expedite a critical review of manuscripts in order to ensure rapid publication of papers of a high scientific standard.
期刊最新文献
Prevalence and etiology of ventilator-associated pneumonia during the COVID-19 pandemic in Denmark: Wave-dependent lessons learned from a mixed-ICU. Lack of correlation between biomarkers and acute kidney injury after pediatric cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass: Should be look for something else? Quantity: More markers, more merit Serious adverse events reporting in recent randomised clinical trials in intensive care medicine – A methodological study protocol In-hospital cardiac arrest registries and aetiology of cardiac arrest.
×
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