Approaches to Assessing the Quality of Observational Studies of Clinical Practice Based on the Big Data Analysis
Open Access
- 3 September 2021
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Silicea - Poligraf in Rational Pharmacotherapy in Cardiology
- Vol. 17 (4), 584-593
- https://doi.org/10.20996/1819-6446-2021-08-01
Abstract
The article is devoted to the discussion of the problems of assessing the quality of observational studies in real clinical practice and determining their place in the hierarchy of evidence-based information. The concept of “big data” and the acceptability of using such a term to refer to large observational studies is being discussed. Data on the limitations of administrative and claims databases when performing observational studies to assess the effects of interventions are presented. The concept of confounding factors influencing the results of observational studies is discussed. Modern approaches to reducing the severity of bias in real-life clinical practice studies are presented. The criteria for assessing the quality of observational pharmacoepidemiological studies and the fundamental differences between such studies and randomized clinical trials are presented. The results of systematic reviews of real-life clinical trials to assess the effects of direct oral anticoagulants are discussed.Keywords
This publication has 37 references indexed in Scilit:
- Big Data Opportunities for Global Infectious Disease SurveillancePLoS Medicine, 2013
- Do observational studies using propensity score methods agree with randomized trials? A systematic comparison of studies on acute coronary syndromesEuropean Heart Journal, 2012
- Increasing scientific standards, independence and transparency in post‐authorisation studies: the role of the European Network of Centres for Pharmacoepidemiology and PharmacovigilancePharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 2012
- Understanding Confounding in ResearchPediatrics in Review, 2010
- High-dimensional Propensity Score Adjustment in Studies of Treatment Effects Using Health Care Claims DataEpidemiology, 2009
- Observational Studies Analyzed Like Randomized ExperimentsEpidemiology, 2008
- A Comparison of Aprotinin and Lysine Analogues in High-Risk Cardiac SurgeryThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2008
- Aprotinin during Coronary-Artery Bypass Grafting and Risk of DeathThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2008
- Risks and Benefits of Estrogen Plus Progestin in Healthy Postmenopausal Women: Principal Results From the Women's Health Initiative Randomized Controlled TrialJAMA, 2002
- Postmenopausal Estrogen Therapy and Cardiovascular DiseaseThe New England Journal of Medicine, 1991