FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2131955313> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2131955313 endingPage "230" @default.
• W2131955313 startingPage "217" @default.
• W2131955313 abstract "In both the United States and Europe there has been an increased interest in using comparative effectiveness research of interventions to inform health policy decisions. Prospective observational studies will undoubtedly be conducted with increased frequency to assess the comparative effectiveness of different treatments, including as a tool for coverage with evidence development, risk-sharing contracting, or key element in a learning health-care system. The principle alternatives for comparative effectiveness research include retrospective observational studies, prospective observational studies, randomized clinical trials, and naturalistic (pragmatic) randomized clinical trials.This report details the recommendations of a Good Research Practice Task Force on Prospective Observational Studies for comparative effectiveness research. Key issues discussed include how to decide when to do a prospective observational study in light of its advantages and disadvantages with respect to alternatives, and the report summarizes the challenges and approaches to the appropriate design, analysis, and execution of prospective observational studies to make them most valuable and relevant to health-care decision makers.The task force emphasizes the need for precision and clarity in specifying the key policy questions to be addressed and that studies should be designed with a goal of drawing causal inferences whenever possible. If a study is being performed to support a policy decision, then it should be designed as hypothesis testing-this requires drafting a protocol as if subjects were to be randomized and that investigators clearly state the purpose or main hypotheses, define the treatment groups and outcomes, identify all measured and unmeasured confounders, and specify the primary analyses and required sample size. Separate from analytic and statistical approaches, study design choices may strengthen the ability to address potential biases and confounding in prospective observational studies. The use of inception cohorts, new user designs, multiple comparator groups, matching designs, and assessment of outcomes thought not to be impacted by the therapies being compared are several strategies that should be given strong consideration recognizing that there may be feasibility constraints. The reasoning behind all study design and analytic choices should be transparent and explained in study protocol. Execution of prospective observational studies is as important as their design and analysis in ensuring that results are valuable and relevant, especially capturing the target population of interest, having reasonably complete and nondifferential follow-up. Similar to the concept of the importance of declaring a prespecified hypothesis, we believe that the credibility of many prospective observational studies would be enhanced by their registration on appropriate publicly accessible sites (e.g., clinicaltrials.gov and encepp.eu) in advance of their execution." @default.
• W2131955313 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2131955313 creator A5003617528 @default.
• W2131955313 creator A5015697849 @default.
• W2131955313 creator A5054823051 @default.
• W2131955313 creator A5072813910 @default.
• W2131955313 creator A5072881675 @default.
• W2131955313 creator A5088271216 @default.
• W2131955313 date "2012-03-01" @default.
• W2131955313 modified "2023-09-30" @default.
• W2131955313 title "Prospective Observational Studies to Assess Comparative Effectiveness: The ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force Report" @default.
• W2131955313 cites W1483490421 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W1964073654 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W1973702706 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W1977374602 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W1979423827 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W1982910299 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W1987144071 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W1992300775 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W1992480169 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2000040238 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2006705213 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2008570024 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2014415089 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2023149067 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2029925430 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2035613254 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2037350580 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2046968828 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2061214350 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2062359643 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2063463192 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2063607014 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2063736901 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2076048783 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2083983813 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2101864423 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2106708607 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2107569667 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2111714917 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2121671594 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2121797973 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2128659393 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2131981044 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2138740885 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2142258305 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2149098146 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2153012086 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2153434255 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2155163959 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2157117527 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2164595809 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2164821482 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2165506412 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2167165853 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2171438563 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2330924252 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2811157820 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W2949540592 @default.
• W2131955313 cites W3022423927 @default.
• W2131955313 doi "https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2011.12.010" @default.
• W2131955313 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22433752" @default.
• W2131955313 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W2131955313 type Work @default.
• W2131955313 sameAs 2131955313 @default.
• W2131955313 citedByCount "152" @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132012 @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132013 @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132014 @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132015 @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132016 @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132017 @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132018 @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132019 @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132020 @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132021 @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132022 @default.
• W2131955313 countsByYear W21319553132023 @default.
• W2131955313 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2131955313 hasAuthorship W2131955313A5003617528 @default.
• W2131955313 hasAuthorship W2131955313A5015697849 @default.
• W2131955313 hasAuthorship W2131955313A5054823051 @default.
• W2131955313 hasAuthorship W2131955313A5072813910 @default.
• W2131955313 hasAuthorship W2131955313A5072881675 @default.
• W2131955313 hasAuthorship W2131955313A5088271216 @default.
• W2131955313 hasBestOaLocation W21319553131 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C112930515 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C159110408 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C176743888 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C23131810 @default.
• W2131955313 hasConcept C27415008 @default.

• next