APPRAISE: A Tool for Appraising Potential for Bias in Real-World Evidence Studies on Medication Effectiveness or Safety.

IF 6 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS
Katsiaryna Bykov, Ashley Jaksa, Jennifer L Lund, Jessica M Franklin, Cynthia J Girman, Madlen Gazarian, Hongbo Yuan, Stephen Duffield, Seamus Kent, Elisabetta Patorno
{"title":"APPRAISE: A Tool for Appraising Potential for Bias in Real-World Evidence Studies on Medication Effectiveness or Safety.","authors":"Katsiaryna Bykov, Ashley Jaksa, Jennifer L Lund, Jessica M Franklin, Cynthia J Girman, Madlen Gazarian, Hongbo Yuan, Stephen Duffield, Seamus Kent, Elisabetta Patorno","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2025.07.024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Real-world evidence (RWE) plays an increasingly important role in health technology assessment (HTA), as well as regulatory and clinical decision making. RWE studies, however, are subject to multiple sources of bias, which are often not easy to identify, impeding credibility and inclusion of RWE in decision making. A comprehensive, fit-for-purpose, and easy-to-use bias assessment tool would help streamline RWE evaluation, enabling efficient utilization of RWE for decision making globally.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A working group of the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology collaborated with HTA experts to develop a tool that could guide bias assessment in observational studies on the comparative safety and effectiveness of medications, building upon existing methodological tools, best practice guidelines, and checklists for the analysis of real-world data. The tool was further tested and refined in collaboration with HTA agencies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>APPRAISE (APpraisal of Potential for Bias in ReAl-World EvIdence StudiEs) covers key domains through which bias might be introduced into an RWE study: inappropriate study design and analysis, exposure and outcome misclassification, and confounding. Each domain contains a series of questions. Responses to questions auto-populate a summary of the potential for bias within each domain and of the actions to take to avoid, mitigate, or explore the impact of bias.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>APPRAISE is a tool to guide bias assessment in observational studies on medication comparative effectiveness or safety. Although the tool was designed for HTA, it will be useful for many other users of RWE and will help guide optimized RWE generation.</p>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12392756/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2025.07.024","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Real-world evidence (RWE) plays an increasingly important role in health technology assessment (HTA), as well as regulatory and clinical decision making. RWE studies, however, are subject to multiple sources of bias, which are often not easy to identify, impeding credibility and inclusion of RWE in decision making. A comprehensive, fit-for-purpose, and easy-to-use bias assessment tool would help streamline RWE evaluation, enabling efficient utilization of RWE for decision making globally.

Methods: A working group of the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology collaborated with HTA experts to develop a tool that could guide bias assessment in observational studies on the comparative safety and effectiveness of medications, building upon existing methodological tools, best practice guidelines, and checklists for the analysis of real-world data. The tool was further tested and refined in collaboration with HTA agencies.

Results: APPRAISE (APpraisal of Potential for Bias in ReAl-World EvIdence StudiEs) covers key domains through which bias might be introduced into an RWE study: inappropriate study design and analysis, exposure and outcome misclassification, and confounding. Each domain contains a series of questions. Responses to questions auto-populate a summary of the potential for bias within each domain and of the actions to take to avoid, mitigate, or explore the impact of bias.

Conclusions: APPRAISE is a tool to guide bias assessment in observational studies on medication comparative effectiveness or safety. Although the tool was designed for HTA, it will be useful for many other users of RWE and will help guide optimized RWE generation.

评价:在药物有效性或安全性的真实证据研究中评估潜在偏倚的工具。
目的:真实世界证据(RWE)在卫生技术评估(HTA)以及监管和临床决策中发挥着越来越重要的作用。然而,RWE研究受到多种偏见来源的影响,这些偏见往往不容易识别,阻碍了RWE在决策中的可信度和包容性。一个全面的、符合目的的、易于使用的偏见评估工具将有助于简化RWE评估,从而在全球范围内有效地利用RWE进行决策。方法:国际药物流行病学学会(ISPE)的一个工作组与HTA专家合作开发了一个工具,该工具可以在现有的方法学工具、最佳实践指南和现实世界数据分析清单的基础上,指导药物相对安全性和有效性观察性研究中的偏倚评估。与人道主义事务管理局各机构合作,对该工具进行了进一步测试和改进。结果:评估(评估现实世界证据研究中的潜在偏倚)涵盖了RWE研究中可能引入偏倚的关键领域:不适当的研究设计和分析,暴露和结果错误分类,以及混淆。每个领域包含一系列问题。对问题的回答会自动填充每个领域中潜在偏见的摘要,以及为避免、减轻或探索偏见影响而采取的行动。结论:在药物比较有效性或安全性的观察性研究中,APPRAISE是一种指导偏倚评估的工具。虽然该工具是为HTA设计的,但它对RWE的许多其他用户也很有用,并有助于指导优化的RWE生成。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信