Treatment effect sizes vary in randomized trials depending on the type of outcome measure
Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Kommentar/debat › Forskning
Objective: To compare estimated treatment effects of physical therapy (PT) between patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and outcomes measured in other ways. Study Design and Setting: We selected randomized trials of PT with both a PROM and a non-PROM included in Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs). Two reviewers independently extracted data and risk-of-bias assessments. Our primary outcome was the ratio of odds ratios (RORs), used to quantify how effect varies between PROMs and non-PROMs; an ROR > 1 indicates larger effect when assessed by using PROMs. We used REML-methods to estimate associations of trial characteristics with effects and between-trial heterogeneity. Results: From 90 relevant CSRs, 205 PT trials were included. The summary ROR across all the comparisons was not statistically significant (ROR, 0.88 [95% CI: 0.70–1.12]; P = 0.30); however, the heterogeneity was substantial (I2 = 88.1%). When stratifying non-PROMs further into clearly objective non-PROMs (e.g., biomarkers) and other non-PROMs (e.g., aerobic capacity), the PROMs appeared more favorable than did clearly objective non-PROMs (ROR, 1.92 [95% CI: 0.99–3.72]; P = 0.05). Conclusion: Estimated treatment effects based on PROMs are generally comparable with treatment effects measured in other ways. However, in our study, PROMs indicate a more favorable treatment effect compared with treatment effects based on clearly objective outcomes.
Originalsprog | Engelsk |
---|---|
Tidsskrift | Journal of Clinical Epidemiology |
Vol/bind | 123 |
Sider (fra-til) | 27-38 |
ISSN | 0895-4356 |
DOI |
|
Status | Udgivet - 2020 |
Bibliografisk note
CONTROVERSY & DEBATE SERIES: Controversy and Debate on Meta-epidemiology. Paper 1.
ID: 249815073