Assessing the Collective Population Representativeness of Related Type 2 Diabetes Trials by Combining Public Data from ClinicalTrials.gov and NHANES.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: He Z
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4586087 | biostudies-literature | 2015
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Assessing the Collective Population Representativeness of Related Type 2 Diabetes Trials by Combining Public Data from ClinicalTrials.gov and NHANES.
He Zhe Z Wang Shuang S Borhanian Elhaam E Weng Chunhua C
Studies in health technology and informatics 20150101
Randomized controlled trials generate high-quality medical evidence. However, the use of unjustified inclusion/exclusion criteria may compromise the external validity of a study. We have introduced a method to assess the population representativeness of related clinical trials using electronic health record (EHR) data. As EHR data may not perfectly represent the real-world patient population, in this work, we further validated the method and its results using the National Health and Nutrition Ex ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background/aimsWhen the randomized clusters in a cluster randomized trial are selected based on characteristics that influence treatment effectiveness, results from the trial may not be directly applicable to the target population. We used data from two large nursing home-based pragmatic cluster randomized trials to compare nursing home and resident characteristics in randomized facilities to eligible non-randomized and ineligible facilities.MethodsWe linked data from the high-dose influenza vaccine trial and the Music & Memory Pragmatic TRIal for Nursing Home Residents with ALzheimer's Disease (METRICaL) to nursing home assessments and Medicare fee-for-service claims. The target population for the high-dose trial comprised Medicare-certified nursing homes; the target population for the METRICaL trial comprised nursing homes in one of four US-based nursing home chains. We used standardized mean differences to compare facility and individual characteristics across the three groups and logistic regression to model the probability of nursing home trial participation.ResultsIn the high-dose trial, 4476 (29%) of the 15,502 nursing homes in the target population were eligible for the trial, of which 818 (18%) were randomized. Of the 1,361,122 residents, 91,179 (6.7%) were residents of randomized facilities, 463,703 (34.0%) of eligible non-randomized facilities, and 806,205 (59.3%) of ineligible facilities. In the METRICaL trial, 160 (59%) of the 270 nursing homes in the target population were eligible for the trial, of which 80 (50%) were randomized. Of the 20,262 residents, 973 (34.4%) were residents of randomized facilities, 7431 (36.7%) of eligible non-randomized facilities, and 5858 (28.9%) of ineligible facilities. In the high-dose trial, randomized facilities differed from eligible non-randomized and ineligible facilities by the number of beds (132.5 vs 145.9 and 91.9, respectively), for-profit status (91.8% vs 66.8% and 68.8%), belonging to a nursing home chain (85.8% vs 49.9% and 54.7%), and presence of a special care unit (19.8% vs 25.9% and 14.4%). In the METRICaL trial randomized facilities differed from eligible non-randomized and ineligible facilities by the number of beds (103.7 vs 110.5 and 67.0), resource-poor status (4.6% vs 10.0% and 18.8%), and presence of a special care unit (26.3% vs 33.8% and 10.9%). In both trials, the characteristics of residents in randomized facilities were similar across the three groups.ConclusionIn both trials, facility-level characteristics of randomized nursing homes differed considerably from those of eligible non-randomized and ineligible facilities, while there was little difference in resident-level characteristics across the three groups. Investigators should assess the characteristics of clusters that participate in cluster randomized trials, not just the individuals within the clusters, when examining the applicability of trial results beyond participating clusters.
| S-EPMC10811279 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsTo compare the characteristics of individuals participating in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of treatments of substance use disorder (SUD) with individuals receiving treatment in usual care settings, and to provide a summary quantitative measure of differences between characteristics of these two groups of individuals using propensity score methods. Design Analyses using data from RCT samples from the National Institute of Drug Abuse Clinical Trials Network (CTN) and target populations of patients drawn from the Treatment Episodes Data Set-Admissions (TEDS-A). Settings Multiple clinical trial sites and nation-wide usual SUD treatment settings in the United States.ParticipantsA total of 3592 individuals from 10 CTN samples and 1 602 226 individuals selected from TEDS-A between 2001 and 2009. Measurements The propensity scores for enrolling in the RCTs were computed based on the following nine observable characteristics: sex, race/ethnicity, age, education, employment status, marital status, admission to treatment through criminal justice, intravenous drug use and the number of prior treatments. Findings The proportion of those with ≥ 12 years of education and the proportion of those who had full-time jobs were significantly higher among RCT samples than among target populations (in seven and nine trials, respectively, at P < 0.001). The pooled difference in the mean propensity scores between the RCTs and the target population was 1.54 standard deviations and was statistically significant at P < 0.001.ConclusionsIn the United States, individuals recruited into randomized controlled trials of substance use disorder treatments appear to be very different from individuals receiving treatment in usual care settings. Notably, RCT participants tend to have more years of education and a greater likelihood of full-time work compared with people receiving care in usual care settings.
| S-EPMC4899104 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe discovery of the CRISPR-Cas9-based gene editing method has opened unprecedented new potential for biological and medical engineering, sparking a growing public debate on both the potential and dangers of CRISPR applications. Given the speed of technology development and the almost instantaneous global spread of news, it is important to follow evolving debates without much delay and in sufficient detail, as certain events may have a major long-term impact on public opinion and later influence policy decisions.ObjectiveSocial media networks such as Twitter have shown to be major drivers of news dissemination and public discourse. They provide a vast amount of semistructured data in almost real-time and give direct access to the content of the conversations. We can now mine and analyze such data quickly because of recent developments in machine learning and natural language processing.MethodsHere, we used Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers (BERT), an attention-based transformer model, in combination with statistical methods to analyze the entirety of all tweets ever published on CRISPR since the publication of the first gene editing application in 2013.ResultsWe show that the mean sentiment of tweets was initially very positive, but began to decrease over time, and that this decline was driven by rare peaks of strong negative sentiments. Due to the high temporal resolution of the data, we were able to associate these peaks with specific events and to observe how trending topics changed over time.ConclusionsOverall, this type of analysis can provide valuable and complementary insights into ongoing public debates, extending the traditional empirical bioethics toolset.
| S-EPMC7490675 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Health surveys are an important resource for monitoring population health, but selective nonresponse may impede valid inference. This study aimed to assess nonresponse bias in a population-sampled health survey in Scotland, with a focus on alcohol-related outcomes. Nonresponse bias was assessed by examining whether rates of alcohol-related harm (i.e., hospitalization or death) and all-cause mortality among respondents to the Scottish Health Surveys (from 1995 to 2010) were equivalent to those in the general population, and whether the extent of any bias varied according to sociodemographic attributes or over time. Data from consenting respondents (aged 20-64 years) to 6 Scottish Health Surveys were confidentially linked to death and hospitalization records and compared with general population counterparts. Directly age-standardized incidence rates of alcohol-related harm and all-cause mortality were lower among Scottish Health Survey respondents compared with the general population. For all years combined, the survey-to-population rate ratios were 0.69 (95% confidence interval: 0.61, 0.76) for the incidence of alcohol-related harm and 0.89 (95% confidence interval: 0.83, 0.96) for all-cause mortality. Bias was more pronounced among persons residing in more deprived areas; limited evidence was found for regional or temporal variation. This suggests that corresponding underestimation of population rates of alcohol consumption is likely to be socially patterned.
| S-EPMC4207717 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveThe population representativeness of a clinical study is influenced by how real-world patients qualify for the study. We analyze the representativeness of eligible patients for multiple type 2 diabetes trials and the relationship between representativeness and other trial characteristics.MethodsSixty-nine study traits available in the electronic health record data for 2034 patients with type 2 diabetes were used to profile the target patients for type 2 diabetes trials. A set of 1691 type 2 diabetes trials was identified from ClinicalTrials.gov, and their population representativeness was calculated using the published Generalizability Index of Study Traits 2.0 metric. The relationships between population representativeness and number of traits and between trial duration and trial metadata were statistically analyzed. A focused analysis with only phase 2 and 3 interventional trials was also conducted.ResultsA total of 869 of 1691 trials (51.4%) and 412 of 776 phase 2 and 3 interventional trials (53.1%) had a population representativeness of <5%. The overall representativeness was significantly correlated with the representativeness of the Hba1c criterion. The greater the number of criteria or the shorter the trial, the less the representativeness. Among the trial metadata, phase, recruitment status, and start year were found to have a statistically significant effect on population representativeness. For phase 2 and 3 interventional trials, only start year was significantly associated with representativeness.ConclusionsOur study quantified the representativeness of multiple type 2 diabetes trials. The common low representativeness of type 2 diabetes trials could be attributed to specific study design requirements of trials or safety concerns. Rather than criticizing the low representativeness, we contribute a method for increasing the transparency of the representativeness of clinical trials.
| S-EPMC7378875 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn a randomized crossover trial, each participant is randomized to a sequence of treatments and treatment effect is estimated based on within-individual difference because each participant serves as his/her own control. This feature makes the design and reporting of randomized crossover trials different from that of parallel trials. Our objective was to characterize phase 3 crossover trials with results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov and identify issues and best practices for reporting.MethodsWe searched ClinicalTrials.gov for phase 3 randomized crossover trials that provided results, registered at least one primary outcome, and included at least one link to a results publication in the record by August 6, 2019. Two reviewers independently assessed the eligibility and extracted information from each record into an electronic form developed and maintained in the Systematic Review Data Repository.ResultsOf the 124 crossover trials analyzed, two thirds were a simple "Intervention A then B" or "Intervention B then A" (AB|BA) design. Most trials (78%, 97/124) provided enough information to understand the participant flow throughout the trial. Baseline characteristics were most often reported for all participants as a single group (52%, 65/124). Primary outcomes and adverse events were most commonly reported "per intervention" (85%, 105/124, and 80%, 99/124, respectively).ConclusionsThe registration and reporting of randomized crossover trials must account for the paired nature of the design. Our observations and recommendations informed the development of guidelines for good reporting practices in the registration and reporting of randomized crossover trials.
| S-EPMC7336618 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAchieving transparency in clinical trials, through either publishing results in a journal or posting results to the ClinicalTrials.gov (CTG) web site, is an essential public health good. However, it remains unknown what proportion of completed studies achieve public disclosure of results (PDOR), or what factors explain these differences.MethodsWe analyzed data from 400 randomly selected studies within the CTG database that had been listed as 'completed' and had at least four years in which to disclose results. Using Kaplan-Meier curves, we calculated times from completion to PDOR (defined as publishing the primary outcomes in a journal and/or posting results to CTG), and identified explanatory variables predicting these outcomes using Cox proportional hazards models.FindingsAmong the 400 clinical trials, 118 (29.5%) failed to achieve PDOR within four years of completion. The median day from study completion to PDOR among 282 studies (70.5%) that achieved PDOR was 602 days (mean 647 days, SD 454 days). Studies were less likely to achieve PDOR if at earlier stages (phase 2 vs. phase 3/4, adjusted HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.47-0.78), if they only included adult subjects (adjusted HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.83), involved randomization (adjusted HR 0.62, 95% CI 0.46-0.83), or had smaller sample sizes (≤50 subjects vs. >50, adjusted HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.44-0.83). Industry-funded studies were significantly less likely to be published than non-industry or blended studies (adjusted HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.36-0.66).ConclusionsA significant proportion of completed studies did not achieve PDOR within the four years of follow-up, particularly smaller studies at earlier stages of development with industry funding. This constitutes reporting bias and threatens the validity of the clinical research literature in the US.
| S-EPMC4098992 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsClinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are published to guide the management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aimed to critically appraise the representativeness and standard of care of randomised clinical trials (RCTs) supporting CPGs for ACS.Methods and resultsAmerican and European CPGs for ST- and non-ST-elevation ACS were screened to extract all references (n = 2128) and recommendations (n = 600). Among the 407 primary publications of RCTs (19.1%), there were 52.6 and 73.2% recruiting patients in North America and Europe, respectively, whereas other regions were largely under-represented (e.g. 25.3% RCTs recruited in Asia). There was 68.6% RCTs enrolling patient with ACS, whereas the remaining 31.4% did not enrol any patient with ACS. There was under-representation of some important subgroups, including elderly, female (29.9%), and non-white patients (<20%). The incidence and type of reperfusion reported in these RCTs were not reflective of current clinical practice (the percentage of patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among all RCTs was 42.7%; whereas for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction patients, the number of participants who underwent fibrinolysis was 3.3-fold higher than those who underwent primary PCI). All-cause mortality in these RCTs was 11.9% in RCTs with a follow-up ≤ 1 year.ConclusionRandomised clinical trials supporting CPGs for ACS are not fully representative of the diversity of the ACS population and their current standard of care. While some of these issues with representativeness may be explained by how evidence has been accrued over time, efforts should be made by trialists to ensure that the evidence supporting CPGs is representative of the wider ACS population.
| S-EPMC10745262 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe applicability of randomised controlled trials of pharmacological agents to older people with frailty/multimorbidity is often uncertain, due to concerns that trials are not representative. However, assessing trial representativeness is challenging and complex. We explore an approach assessing trial representativeness by comparing rates of trial serious adverse events (SAE) to rates of hospitalisation/death in routine care.MethodsThis was an observational analysis of individual (125 trials, n=122,069) and aggregate-level drug trial data (483 trials, n=636,267) for 21 index conditions compared to population-based routine healthcare data (routine care). Trials were identified from ClinicalTrials.gov . Routine care comparison from linked primary care and hospital data from Wales, UK (n=2.3M). Our outcome of interest was SAEs (routinely reported in trials). In routine care, SAEs were based on hospitalisations and deaths (which are SAEs by definition). We compared trial SAEs in trials to expected SAEs based on age/sex standardised routine care populations with the same index condition. Using IPD, we assessed the relationship between multimorbidity count and SAEs in both trials and routine care and assessed the impact on the observed/expected SAE ratio additionally accounting for multimorbidity.ResultsFor 12/21 index conditions, the pooled observed/expected SAE ratio was <1, indicating fewer SAEs in trial participants than in routine care. A further 6/21 had point estimates <1 but the 95% CI included the null. The median pooled estimate of observed/expected SAE ratio was 0.60 (95% CI 0.55-0.64; COPD) and the interquartile range was 0.44 (0.34-0.55; Parkinson's disease) to 0.87 (0.58-1.29; inflammatory bowel disease). Higher multimorbidity count was associated with SAEs across all index conditions in both routine care and trials. For most trials, the observed/expected SAE ratio moved closer to 1 after additionally accounting for multimorbidity count, but it nonetheless remained below 1 for most.ConclusionsTrial participants experience fewer SAEs than expected based on age/sex/condition hospitalisation and death rates in routine care, confirming the predicted lack of representativeness. This difference is only partially explained by differences in multimorbidity. Assessing observed/expected SAE may help assess the applicability of trial findings to older populations in whom multimorbidity and frailty are common.
| S-EPMC9615407 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The registry ClinicalTrials.gov was created to provide investigators and patients an accessible database of relevant clinical trials.To understand the state of sickle cell disease clinical trials, a comprehensive review of all 174 "closed," "interventional" sickle cell trials registered at ClinicalTrials.gov was completed in January 2015.The majority of registered sickle cell disease clinical trials listed an academic center as the primary sponsor and were an early phase trial. The primary outcome for sickle cell disease trials focused on pain (23%), bone marrow transplant (BMT) (13%), hydroxyurea (8%), iron overload (8%), and pulmonary hypertension (8%). A total of 52 trials were listed as terminated or withdrawn, including 25 (14% of all trials) terminated for failure to enroll participants. At the time of this review, only 19 trials uploaded results and 29 trials uploaded a manuscript in the ClinicalTrials.gov database. A systematic review of pubmed.gov revealed that only 35% of sickle cell studies completed prior to 2014 resulted in an identified manuscript. In comparison, of 80 thalassemia trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, four acknowledged failure to enroll participants as a reason for trial termination or withdrawal, and 48 trials (60%) completed prior to 2014 resulted in a currently identified manuscript.ClinicalTrials.gov can be an important database for investigators and patients with sickle cell disease to understand the current available research trials. To enhance the validity of the website, investigators must update their trial results and upload trial manuscripts into the database. This study, for the first time, quantifies outcomes of sickle cell disease trials and provides support to the belief that barriers exist to successful completion, publication, and dissemination of sickle cell trial results.
| S-EPMC4643416 | biostudies-literature