6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Implementation of the trial emulation approach in medical research: a scoping review

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          When conducting randomised controlled trials is impractical, an alternative is to carry out an observational study. However, making valid causal inferences from observational data is challenging because of the risk of several statistical biases. In 2016 Hernán and Robins put forward the ‘target trial framework’ as a guide to best design and analyse observational studies whilst preventing the most common biases. This framework consists of (1) clearly defining a causal question about an intervention, (2) specifying the protocol of the hypothetical trial, and (3) explaining how the observational data will be used to emulate it.

          Methods

          The aim of this scoping review was to identify and review all explicit attempts of trial emulation studies across all medical fields. Embase, Medline and Web of Science were searched for trial emulation studies published in English from database inception to February 25, 2021. The following information was extracted from studies that were deemed eligible for review: the subject area, the type of observational data that they leveraged, and the statistical methods they used to address the following biases: (A) confounding bias, (B) immortal time bias, and (C) selection bias.

          Results

          The search resulted in 617 studies, 38 of which we deemed eligible for review. Of those 38 studies, most focused on cardiology, infectious diseases or oncology and the majority used electronic health records/electronic medical records data and cohort studies data. Different statistical methods were used to address confounding at baseline and selection bias, predominantly conditioning on the confounders ( N = 18/49, 37%) and inverse probability of censoring weighting ( N = 7/20, 35%) respectively. Different approaches were used to address immortal time bias, assigning individuals to treatment strategies at start of follow-up based on their data available at that specific time ( N = 21, 55%), using the sequential trial emulations approach ( N = 11, 29%) or the cloning approach ( N = 6, 16%).

          Conclusion

          Different methods can be leveraged to address (A) confounding bias, (B) immortal time bias, and (C) selection bias. When working with observational data, and if possible, the ‘target trial’ framework should be used as it provides a structured conceptual approach to observational research.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-023-02000-9.

          Related collections

          Most cited references53

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Using Big Data to Emulate a Target Trial When a Randomized Trial Is Not Available.

          Ideally, questions about comparative effectiveness or safety would be answered using an appropriately designed and conducted randomized experiment. When we cannot conduct a randomized experiment, we analyze observational data. Causal inference from large observational databases (big data) can be viewed as an attempt to emulate a randomized experiment-the target experiment or target trial-that would answer the question of interest. When the goal is to guide decisions among several strategies, causal analyses of observational data need to be evaluated with respect to how well they emulate a particular target trial. We outline a framework for comparative effectiveness research using big data that makes the target trial explicit. This framework channels counterfactual theory for comparing the effects of sustained treatment strategies, organizes analytic approaches, provides a structured process for the criticism of observational studies, and helps avoid common methodologic pitfalls.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            A Structural Approach to Selection Bias

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Marginal structural models to estimate the causal effect of zidovudine on the survival of HIV-positive men.

              Standard methods for survival analysis, such as the time-dependent Cox model, may produce biased effect estimates when there exist time-dependent confounders that are themselves affected by previous treatment or exposure. Marginal structural models are a new class of causal models the parameters of which are estimated through inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting; these models allow for appropriate adjustment for confounding. We describe the marginal structural Cox proportional hazards model and use it to estimate the causal effect of zidovudine on the survival of human immunodeficiency virus-positive men participating in the Multicenter AIDS Cohort Study. In this study, CD4 lymphocyte count is both a time-dependent confounder of the causal effect of zidovudine on survival and is affected by past zidovudine treatment. The crude mortality rate ratio (95% confidence interval) for zidovudine was 3.6 (3.0-4.3), which reflects the presence of confounding. After controlling for baseline CD4 count and other baseline covariates using standard methods, the mortality rate ratio decreased to 2.3 (1.9-2.8). Using a marginal structural Cox model to control further for time-dependent confounding due to CD4 count and other time-dependent covariates, the mortality rate ratio was 0.7 (95% conservative confidence interval = 0.6-1.0). We compare marginal structural models with previously proposed causal methods.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                giulio.1.scola@kcl.ac.uk
                anca.m.chis_ster@kcl.ac.uk
                daniel.bean@kcl.ac.uk
                nileshpareek@nhs.net
                richard.emsley@kcl.ac.uk
                sabine.landau@kcl.ac.uk
                Journal
                BMC Med Res Methodol
                BMC Med Res Methodol
                BMC Medical Research Methodology
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2288
                16 August 2023
                16 August 2023
                2023
                : 23
                : 186
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.13097.3c, ISNI 0000 0001 2322 6764, Department of Biostatistics and Health Informatics, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, , King’s College London, ; London, UK
                [2 ]GRID grid.83440.3b, ISNI 0000000121901201, Health Data Research UK London, Institute of Health Informatics, , University College London, ; London, UK
                [3 ]GRID grid.429705.d, ISNI 0000 0004 0489 4320, King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, ; London, UK
                [4 ]GRID grid.13097.3c, ISNI 0000 0001 2322 6764, School of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine & Sciences, , BHF Centre of Excellence, King’s College London, ; London, UK
                Article
                2000
                10.1186/s12874-023-02000-9
                10428565
                37587484
                6689ab2a-fc77-4a06-886b-b5e2cd6eb6cc
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

                Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 16 November 2022
                : 25 July 2023
                Funding
                Funded by: British Heart Foundation
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100023232, National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration South London;
                Funded by: King’s College London funded centre for Doctoral Training in Data-Driven Health
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100023699, Health Data Research UK;
                Funded by: NHS AI Lab
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100019418, NIHR Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre;
                Funded by: FundRef http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272, National Institute for Health and Care Research;
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2023

                Medicine
                causal inference,target trial,trial emulation,observational data
                Medicine
                causal inference, target trial, trial emulation, observational data

                Comments

                Comment on this article