Rolf H H Groenwold, L X van Rossenberg, D P J Smeeing, R M Houwert, J W Schoones, S P J Muijs, F C Oner, Y de Jong, B J M van de Wall
{"title":"Preventing confounding in observational studies in orthopedic trauma surgery through expert panels: a systematic review.","authors":"Rolf H H Groenwold, L X van Rossenberg, D P J Smeeing, R M Houwert, J W Schoones, S P J Muijs, F C Oner, Y de Jong, B J M van de Wall","doi":"10.1007/s00068-024-02690-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Confounding in observational studies can be mitigated by selecting only those patients, in whom equipoise of both treatments is secured by experts' disagreement over optimal therapy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a systematic review to identify observational studies in the field of orthopedic trauma surgery that utilized expert panels for patient inclusion in order to limit the potential for confounding.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Four studies were identified that used expert panels to select participants based on expert disagreement. Derived from these studies and our own experience, recommendations were made regarding reporting of the size and composition of the expert panel, the information the expert panel receives, criteria for disagreement, selection of patients, and statistical analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With this review we aim to provide insight into this study design and to stimulate discussions about the potential of expert panels to control for confounding in studies of medical treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":12064,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","volume":"51 1","pages":"36"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11762208/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00068-024-02690-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Confounding in observational studies can be mitigated by selecting only those patients, in whom equipoise of both treatments is secured by experts' disagreement over optimal therapy.
Methods: We conducted a systematic review to identify observational studies in the field of orthopedic trauma surgery that utilized expert panels for patient inclusion in order to limit the potential for confounding.
Results: Four studies were identified that used expert panels to select participants based on expert disagreement. Derived from these studies and our own experience, recommendations were made regarding reporting of the size and composition of the expert panel, the information the expert panel receives, criteria for disagreement, selection of patients, and statistical analysis.
Conclusion: With this review we aim to provide insight into this study design and to stimulate discussions about the potential of expert panels to control for confounding in studies of medical treatments.
期刊介绍：
The European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery aims to open an interdisciplinary forum that allows for the scientific exchange between basic and clinical science related to pathophysiology, diagnostics and treatment of traumatized patients. The journal covers all aspects of clinical management, operative treatment and related research of traumatic injuries.
Clinical and experimental papers on issues relevant for the improvement of trauma care are published. Reviews, original articles, short communications and letters allow the appropriate presentation of major and minor topics.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
