Subgroup analysis: application to individual patient decisions.
نویسندگان
چکیده
CLINICAL TRIALS PROVIDE EVIDENCE of effectiveness of treatments as an average for a group of patients, yet, in clinical medicine, we usually wish to apply these results to individuals. Can we simply apply the overall trial result for each patient, or can the result be tailored to individual patients in some way? Consider a hypothetical example: a randomised trial comparing treatments A and B shows that treatment A is more effective than B among men (P < 0.001), but not among women (not signficant). Does this mean men should receive the new treatment, but women should not? Box 1 illustrates these results from three different studies. In Study 1, the estimated treatment effect in men and women is the same — a 25% reduction in mortality associated with treatment A — but the much smaller number of women in the study gives rise to wider confidence intervals for this subgroup. In this case, there is no basis to consider that the treatment is any less effective in women (no heterogeneity; ie, non-significant test for interaction). Treatment could be considered effective for any patient regardless of sex. In Study 2, the treatment effect in women is less than that in men (8% v 25% relative reduction, or 0.92 v 0.75 relative risk, respectively), but the effects in both are still consistent with the overall result of a 20% relative reduction, and there is no evidence of significant heterogeneity between groups (test for interaction, P = 0.20). Here, the different results between men and women could be simply due to chance, and it would still be appropriate to apply the overall estimate to both men and women (unless there was additional evidence). 1 In Study 3, the observed effects for men and women are sufficiently different to suggest that this difference is unlikely to be due to chance (test for interaction, P = 0.01), and it is reasonable to conclude that the treatment effect differs between men and women. In this instance, the trial evidence should be considered separately for these subgroups. However , even here, a test of interaction can still give a low P value simply on the play of chance if many subgroups have been evaluated. 2 A practical approach Consider applying the overall trial treatment effect to each subgroup How should we decide in practice whether to consider the treatment effects for these subgroups separately? A practical approach …
منابع مشابه
Delving Into the Details of Evaluating Public Engagement Initiatives; Comment on “Metrics and Evaluation Tools for Patient Engagement in Healthcare Organization- and System-Level Decision-Making: A Systematic Review”
Initiatives to engage the public in health policy decisions have been widely endorsed and used, yet agreed upon methods for systematically evaluating the effectiveness of these initiatives remain to be developed. Dukhanin, Topazian, and DeCamp have thus developed a useful taxonomy of evaluation criteria derived from a systematic review of published evaluation tools that might serve as the basis...
متن کاملUSERS’ GUIDE TO THE SURGICAL LITERATURE: How to work with a subgroup analysis
S urgical practice should principally be based on evidence originating from high-quality data such as randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Whereas these studies mostly investigate general and representative patient populations, clinical decisions most often depend on individual patient characteristics. To concede to the need of individually based guidelines, many RCTs report analyses on specifi...
متن کاملSurvey medical malpractice in Laser application in medical science refer to forensic medicine during 1395-1399 in Tehran, Iran
Introduction: Today, laser technology is an integral part of medicine, medical malpractice is a major problem in healthcare systems.the purpose of present study was investigation of common causes of injuries, claims, and decisions related to medical malpractice claims related to Laser-therapy. Methods: investigation of legal documents in the coroner’s Office of Forensic Medicine, province of Te...
متن کاملPrioritising, Ranking and Resource Implementation - A Normative Analysis
Background Priority setting in publicly financed healthcare systems should be guided by ethical norms and other considerations viewed as socially valuable, and we find several different approaches for how such norms and considerations guide priorities in healthcare decision-making. Common to many of these approaches is that interventions are ranked in relation to each other, following the appli...
متن کاملA recursive partitioning approach for subgroup identification in individual patient data meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND Motivated by the setting of clinical trials in low back pain, this work investigated statistical methods to identify patient subgroups for which there is a large treatment effect (treatment by subgroup interaction). Statistical tests for interaction are often underpowered. Individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses provide a framework with improved statistical power to investigate s...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- The Medical journal of Australia
دوره 180 9 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2004