Dataset Information

Consensus-based recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Critics of systematic reviews have argued that these studies often fail to inform clinical decision making because their results are far too general, that the data are sparse, such that findings cannot be applied to individual patients or for other decision making. While there is some consensus on methods for investigating statistical and methodological heterogeneity, little attention has been paid to clinical aspects of heterogeneity. Clinical heterogeneity, true effect heterogeneity, can be defined as variability among studies in the participants, the types or timing of outcome measurements, and the intervention characteristics. The objective of this project was to develop recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews.

Methods

We used a modified Delphi technique with three phases: (1) pre-meeting item generation; (2) face-to-face consensus meeting in the form of a modified Delphi process; and (3) post-meeting feedback. We identified and invited potential participants with expertise in systematic review methodology, systematic review reporting, or statistical aspects of meta-analyses, or those who published papers on clinical heterogeneity.

Results

Between April and June of 2011, we conducted phone calls with participants. In June 2011 we held the face-to-face focus group meeting in Ann Arbor, Michigan. First, we agreed upon a definition of clinical heterogeneity: Variations in the treatment effect that are due to differences in clinically related characteristics. Next, we discussed and generated recommendations in the following 12 categories related to investigating clinical heterogeneity: the systematic review team, planning investigations, rationale for choice of variables, types of clinical variables, the role of statistical heterogeneity, the use of plotting and visual aids, dealing with outlier studies, the number of investigations or variables, the role of the best evidence synthesis, types of statistical methods, the interpretation of findings, and reporting.

Conclusions

Clinical heterogeneity is common in systematic reviews. Our recommendations can help guide systematic reviewers in conducting valid and reliable investigations of clinical heterogeneity. Findings of these investigations may allow for increased applicability of findings of systematic reviews to the management of individual patients.

SUBMITTER: Gagnier JJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3847163 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Consensus-based recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews.

Gagnier Joel J JJ Morgenstern Hal H Altman Doug G DG Berlin Jesse J Chang Stephanie S McCulloch Peter P Sun Xin X Moher David D

BMC medical research methodology 20130830

<h4>Background</h4>Critics of systematic reviews have argued that these studies often fail to inform clinical decision making because their results are far too general, that the data are sparse, such that findings cannot be applied to individual patients or for other decision making. While there is some consensus on methods for investigating statistical and methodological heterogeneity, little attention has been paid to clinical aspects of heterogeneity. Clinical heterogeneity, true effect heter ...[more]

PMID: 24004523

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPhase-contrast (PC) MRI is a feasible and valid noninvasive technique to measure renal artery blood flow, showing potential to support diagnosis and monitoring of renal diseases. However, the variability in measured renal blood flow values across studies is large, most likely due to differences in PC-MRI acquisition and processing. Standardized acquisition and processing protocols are therefore needed to minimize this variability and maximize the potential of renal PC-MRI as a clinically useful tool.PurposeTo build technical recommendations for the acquisition, processing, and analysis of renal 2D PC-MRI data in human subjects to promote standardization of renal blood flow measurements and facilitate the comparability of results across scanners and in multicenter clinical studies.Study typeSystematic consensus process using a modified Delphi method.PopulationNot applicable.Sequence field/strengthRenal fast gradient echo-based 2D PC-MRI.AssessmentAn international panel of 27 experts from Europe, the USA, Australia, and Japan with 6 (interquartile range 4-10) years of experience in 2D PC-MRI formulated consensus statements on renal 2D PC-MRI in two rounds of surveys. Starting from a recently published systematic review article, literature-based and data-driven statements regarding patient preparation, hardware, acquisition protocol, analysis steps, and data reporting were formulated.Statistical testsConsensus was defined as ≥75% unanimity in response, and a clear preference was defined as 60-74% agreement among the experts.ResultsAmong 60 statements, 57 (95%) achieved consensus after the second-round survey, while the remaining three showed a clear preference. Consensus statements resulted in specific recommendations for subject preparation, 2D renal PC-MRI data acquisition, processing, and reporting.Data conclusionThese recommendations might promote a widespread adoption of renal PC-MRI, and may help foster the set-up of multicenter studies aimed at defining reference values and building larger and more definitive evidence, and will facilitate clinical translation of PC-MRI.Level of evidence1 TECHNICAL EFFICACY STAGE: 1.

Project description:IntroductionMucopolysaccharidosis (MPS) IVA or Morquio A syndrome is an autosomal recessive lysosomal storage disorder (LSD) caused by deficiency of the N-acetylgalactosamine-6-sulfatase (GALNS) enzyme, which impairs lysosomal degradation of keratan sulphate and chondroitin-6-sulphate. The multiple clinical manifestations of MPS IVA present numerous challenges for management and necessitate the need for individualised treatment. Although treatment guidelines are available, the methodology used to develop this guidance has come under increased scrutiny. This programme was conducted to provide evidence-based, expert-agreed recommendations to optimise management of MPS IVA.MethodsTwenty six international healthcare professionals across multiple disciplines, with expertise in managing MPS IVA, and three patient advocates formed the Steering Committee (SC) and contributed to the development of this guidance. Representatives from six Patient Advocacy Groups (PAGs) were interviewed to gain insights on patient perspectives. A modified-Delphi methodology was used to demonstrate consensus among a wider group of healthcare professionals with experience managing patients with MPS IVA and the manuscript was evaluated against the validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument by three independent reviewers.ResultsA total of 87 guidance statements were developed covering five domains: (1) general management principles; (2) recommended routine monitoring and assessments; (3) disease-modifying interventions (enzyme replacement therapy [ERT] and haematopoietic stem cell transplantation [HSCT]); (4) interventions to support respiratory and sleep disorders; (5) anaesthetics and surgical interventions (including spinal, limb, ophthalmic, cardio-thoracic and ear-nose-throat [ENT] surgeries). Consensus was reached on all statements after two rounds of voting. The overall guideline AGREE II assessment score obtained for the development of the guidance was 5.3/7 (where 1 represents the lowest quality and 7 represents the highest quality of guidance).ConclusionThis manuscript provides evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for the management of patients with MPS IVA and is for use by healthcare professionals that manage the holistic care of patients with the intention to improve clinical- and patient-reported outcomes and enhance patient quality of life. It is recognised that the guidance provided represents a point in time and further research is required to address current knowledge and evidence gaps.

Project description:IntroductionMucopolysaccharidosis (MPS) VI or Maroteaux-Lamy syndrome (253200) is an autosomal recessive lysosomal storage disorder caused by deficiency in N-acetylgalactosamine-4-sulfatase (arylsulfatase B). The heterogeneity and progressive nature of MPS VI necessitates a multidisciplinary team approach and there is a need for robust guidance to achieve optimal management. This programme was convened to develop evidence-based, expert-agreed recommendations for the general principles of management, routine monitoring requirements and the use of medical and surgical interventions in patients with MPS VI.Methods26 international healthcare professionals from various disciplines, all with expertise in managing MPS VI, and three patient advocates formed the Steering Committee group (SC) and contributed to the development of this guidance. Members from six Patient Advocacy Groups (PAGs) acted as advisors and attended interviews to ensure representation of the patient perspective. A modified-Delphi methodology was used to demonstrate consensus among a wider group of healthcare professionals with expertise and experience managing patients with MPS VI and the manuscript has been evaluated against the validated Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument by three independent reviewers.ResultsA total of 93 guidance statements were developed covering five domains: (1) general management principles; (2) recommended routine monitoring and assessments; (3) enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT); (4) interventions to support respiratory and sleep disorders; (5) anaesthetics and surgical interventions. Consensus was reached on all statements after two rounds of voting. The greatest challenges faced by patients as relayed by consultation with PAGs were deficits in endurance, dexterity, hearing, vision and respiratory function. The overall guideline AGREE II assessment score obtained for the development of the guidance was 5.3/7 (where 1 represents the lowest quality and 7 represents the highest quality of guidance).ConclusionThis manuscript provides evidence- and consensus-based recommendations for the management of patients with MPS VI and is for use by healthcare professionals that manage the holistic care of patients with the intention to improve clinical- and patient-reported outcomes and enhance patient quality of life. It is recognised that the guidance provided represents a point in time and further research is required to address current knowledge and evidence gaps.

Dataset Information

Consensus-based recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Consensus-based recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets