评估腰背痛队列研究的代表性:利用电子健康记录数据对研究参与者和非研究参与者进行直接比较。

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of Pain Pub Date : 2024-11-08 DOI:10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104730
Pradeep Suri MD, MS , Adrienne D. Tanus , Ian Stanaway , Hazel Scott , Hannah F. Brubeck , Bianca Irimia , Clinton J. Daniels , Mark P. Jensen , Sean D. Rundell , Andrew K. Timmons , Daniel Morelli , Patrick J. Heagerty
{"title":"评估腰背痛队列研究的代表性:利用电子健康记录数据对研究参与者和非研究参与者进行直接比较。","authors":"Pradeep Suri MD, MS ,&nbsp;Adrienne D. Tanus ,&nbsp;Ian Stanaway ,&nbsp;Hazel Scott ,&nbsp;Hannah F. Brubeck ,&nbsp;Bianca Irimia ,&nbsp;Clinton J. Daniels ,&nbsp;Mark P. Jensen ,&nbsp;Sean D. Rundell ,&nbsp;Andrew K. Timmons ,&nbsp;Daniel Morelli ,&nbsp;Patrick J. Heagerty","doi":"10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104730","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Representativeness is an important component of generalizability. Few studies have rigorously examined the representativeness of randomized trials or observational studies of pain or musculoskeletal conditions with regards to a wide range of factors beyond age, sex, race, and ethnicity. We conducted the first study of a pain condition that uses individual-level data to directly compare the enrolled study sample to the population from which it was drawn. We used electronic health record data from the Veterans Affairs health system to compare participants in an observational study of low back pain (n = 417) with the study population of potentially eligible non-participants who were contacted about the study (n = 15,218). There were no statistically significant differences between participants and non-participants for most factors examined, and differences when present were of small or very small magnitude. Participants were more likely to be older (odds ratio [OR]=1.02 per each additional year of age [95 % CI 1.01–1.03], p &lt; 0.001), women (OR=1.59 [95 % CI 1.26–2.01], p &lt; 0.001), have had a prior diagnosis of lumbosacral radicular syndrome (OR=1.37 [95 % CI 1.08–1.74], p = 0.01), and report lower pain intensity (OR=0.96 per NRS point [95 % CI 0.93–1.00], p = 0.04). Current smokers (OR=0.54 [95 % CI 0.39–0.75], p &lt; 0.001) and people of Asian descent (OR=0.62 [95 % CI 0.39–0.98], p &lt; 0.001) were less likely to participate. This study illustrates an approach to directly compare research participants with non-participants from the study population. This approach can be considered as a standard method to examine the representativeness of study samples in pain research.</div></div><div><h3>Perspective</h3><div>This article illustrates how electronic health record data can be used to directly compare the representativeness of participants in a study of pain to the study population from which participants were selected. This approach should be considered as a standard method to examine the representativeness of study samples during reporting.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51095,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pain","volume":"26 ","pages":"Article 104730"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating the representativeness of a cohort study of low back pain: Using electronic health record data to make direct comparisons of study participants with non-participants from the study population\",\"authors\":\"Pradeep Suri MD, MS ,&nbsp;Adrienne D. Tanus ,&nbsp;Ian Stanaway ,&nbsp;Hazel Scott ,&nbsp;Hannah F. Brubeck ,&nbsp;Bianca Irimia ,&nbsp;Clinton J. Daniels ,&nbsp;Mark P. Jensen ,&nbsp;Sean D. Rundell ,&nbsp;Andrew K. Timmons ,&nbsp;Daniel Morelli ,&nbsp;Patrick J. Heagerty\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jpain.2024.104730\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Representativeness is an important component of generalizability. Few studies have rigorously examined the representativeness of randomized trials or observational studies of pain or musculoskeletal conditions with regards to a wide range of factors beyond age, sex, race, and ethnicity. We conducted the first study of a pain condition that uses individual-level data to directly compare the enrolled study sample to the population from which it was drawn. We used electronic health record data from the Veterans Affairs health system to compare participants in an observational study of low back pain (n = 417) with the study population of potentially eligible non-participants who were contacted about the study (n = 15,218). There were no statistically significant differences between participants and non-participants for most factors examined, and differences when present were of small or very small magnitude. Participants were more likely to be older (odds ratio [OR]=1.02 per each additional year of age [95 % CI 1.01–1.03], p &lt; 0.001), women (OR=1.59 [95 % CI 1.26–2.01], p &lt; 0.001), have had a prior diagnosis of lumbosacral radicular syndrome (OR=1.37 [95 % CI 1.08–1.74], p = 0.01), and report lower pain intensity (OR=0.96 per NRS point [95 % CI 0.93–1.00], p = 0.04). Current smokers (OR=0.54 [95 % CI 0.39–0.75], p &lt; 0.001) and people of Asian descent (OR=0.62 [95 % CI 0.39–0.98], p &lt; 0.001) were less likely to participate. This study illustrates an approach to directly compare research participants with non-participants from the study population. This approach can be considered as a standard method to examine the representativeness of study samples in pain research.</div></div><div><h3>Perspective</h3><div>This article illustrates how electronic health record data can be used to directly compare the representativeness of participants in a study of pain to the study population from which participants were selected. This approach should be considered as a standard method to examine the representativeness of study samples during reporting.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51095,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Pain\",\"volume\":\"26 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104730\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Pain\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1526590024007089\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pain","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1526590024007089","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

代表性是可推广性的重要组成部分。除了年龄、性别、种族和民族等广泛因素外,很少有研究对疼痛或肌肉骨骼状况的随机试验或观察性研究的代表性进行严格检查。我们首次对疼痛病症进行了研究,该研究使用了个人层面的数据来直接比较入组研究样本和抽取样本的人群。我们使用退伍军人事务卫生系统的电子健康记录数据,将腰背痛观察研究的参与者(n = 417)与研究人群(n = 15,218 )进行了比较,研究人群是与研究相关的可能符合条件的非参与者。在大多数考察因素上,参与者和非参与者之间没有统计学意义上的显著差异,即使存在差异,差异程度也很小或非常小。参与者的年龄更大(年龄每增加一岁,几率比 [OR]=1.02 [95 % CI 1.01-1.03], p
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
Evaluating the representativeness of a cohort study of low back pain: Using electronic health record data to make direct comparisons of study participants with non-participants from the study population
Representativeness is an important component of generalizability. Few studies have rigorously examined the representativeness of randomized trials or observational studies of pain or musculoskeletal conditions with regards to a wide range of factors beyond age, sex, race, and ethnicity. We conducted the first study of a pain condition that uses individual-level data to directly compare the enrolled study sample to the population from which it was drawn. We used electronic health record data from the Veterans Affairs health system to compare participants in an observational study of low back pain (n = 417) with the study population of potentially eligible non-participants who were contacted about the study (n = 15,218). There were no statistically significant differences between participants and non-participants for most factors examined, and differences when present were of small or very small magnitude. Participants were more likely to be older (odds ratio [OR]=1.02 per each additional year of age [95 % CI 1.01–1.03], p < 0.001), women (OR=1.59 [95 % CI 1.26–2.01], p < 0.001), have had a prior diagnosis of lumbosacral radicular syndrome (OR=1.37 [95 % CI 1.08–1.74], p = 0.01), and report lower pain intensity (OR=0.96 per NRS point [95 % CI 0.93–1.00], p = 0.04). Current smokers (OR=0.54 [95 % CI 0.39–0.75], p < 0.001) and people of Asian descent (OR=0.62 [95 % CI 0.39–0.98], p < 0.001) were less likely to participate. This study illustrates an approach to directly compare research participants with non-participants from the study population. This approach can be considered as a standard method to examine the representativeness of study samples in pain research.

Perspective

This article illustrates how electronic health record data can be used to directly compare the representativeness of participants in a study of pain to the study population from which participants were selected. This approach should be considered as a standard method to examine the representativeness of study samples during reporting.
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
Journal of Pain
Journal of Pain 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
7.50%
发文量
441
审稿时长
42 days
期刊介绍: The Journal of Pain publishes original articles related to all aspects of pain, including clinical and basic research, patient care, education, and health policy. Articles selected for publication in the Journal are most commonly reports of original clinical research or reports of original basic research. In addition, invited critical reviews, including meta analyses of drugs for pain management, invited commentaries on reviews, and exceptional case studies are published in the Journal. The mission of the Journal is to improve the care of patients in pain by providing a forum for clinical researchers, basic scientists, clinicians, and other health professionals to publish original research.
期刊最新文献
Clinical phenotype and management of sound-induced pain: Insights from adults with pain hyperacusis Neighborhood disadvantage and pain-related experiences in a pain psychology clinic: The mediating roles of pain catastrophizing and pain-related fear Contemporary media campaigns for musculoskeletal pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis with social marketing benchmarking. Chronic pain-induced functional and structural alterations in the brain: a multi-modal meta-analysis. Language Errors in Pain Medicine: An Umbrella 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