Practical guidance for Win Statistics and Tournament Methods for multifaceted outcomes in stroke research: Review and recommendations.

IF 6.9 2区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Hannah Johns, Vignan Yogendrakumar, Nathalie H Launder, Kathryn S Hayward, Lucy Vivash, Terence J O'Brien, Anna H Balabanski, Tolulope Sajobi, Michael D Hill, Guillaume Turc, Bruce C V Campbell, Leonid Churilov
{"title":"Practical guidance for Win Statistics and Tournament Methods for multifaceted outcomes in stroke research: Review and recommendations.","authors":"Hannah Johns, Vignan Yogendrakumar, Nathalie H Launder, Kathryn S Hayward, Lucy Vivash, Terence J O'Brien, Anna H Balabanski, Tolulope Sajobi, Michael D Hill, Guillaume Turc, Bruce C V Campbell, Leonid Churilov","doi":"10.1177/17474930261475853","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Most stroke trials conventionally use outcome measures that reflect a single point of concern, such as functional outcomes or neurological improvement. Such a focus has a limited capacity to reflect the holistic nature of clinical reality, where multiple facets of health are of importance. Other clinical areas are increasingly embracing alternative approaches that better reflect the multifaceted nature of health outcomes, driven by the development of Win Statistics methodology.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Win Statistics compare the outcomes for all possible pairs of patients from the treatment versus control group and summarize the treatment effect as a combination of proportions of such comparisons where the person from the treatment group has a better/worse outcome when compared to the person in the control group. In this context, \"better outcome\" is defined holistically, based on information collected across multiple health facets (e.g. mortality, symptom reduction, and quality of life). Such approaches are highly applicable to stroke research. They are a direct extension of \"Tournament Methods\" that are already used to analyze modified Rankin Scale data, and several stroke trials have already adopted this new approach to better reflect the multifaceted nature of stroke. Despite this, there is little guidance available to stroke researchers who wish to make use of the approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>This article provides a review of how to effectively use Tournament Methods to reflect the multifaceted nature of stroke. We review how Tournament Methods may be used to estimate treatment effects that simultaneously consider multiple clinical outcomes. We describe methods that have been used within stroke to combine multiple clinical outcomes for Tournament Methods analysis, provide an overview of the effect size measure estimates commonly used to summarize treatment effects, and discuss both available statistical methods and software for the analysis, visualization, and reporting of Win Statistics. We provide practical recommendations for conducting and reporting statistical analyses under the Tournament Methods approach using published stroke trials as illustrative examples. We further present newly developed point-and-click software that provides easy access to statistical codes for conducting Tournament Methods analyses and facilitates the use of our recommendations. This software can be downloaded from https://github.com/HannahJohns/compare-wins.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Tournament Methods are flexible and increasingly used within stroke research. We advocate for a principled approach to their use in the design and analysis of stroke trials to better reflect the multifaceted nature of health care.</p>","PeriodicalId":14442,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Stroke","volume":" ","pages":"17474930261475853"},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Stroke","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17474930261475853","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Most stroke trials conventionally use outcome measures that reflect a single point of concern, such as functional outcomes or neurological improvement. Such a focus has a limited capacity to reflect the holistic nature of clinical reality, where multiple facets of health are of importance. Other clinical areas are increasingly embracing alternative approaches that better reflect the multifaceted nature of health outcomes, driven by the development of Win Statistics methodology.

Methods: Win Statistics compare the outcomes for all possible pairs of patients from the treatment versus control group and summarize the treatment effect as a combination of proportions of such comparisons where the person from the treatment group has a better/worse outcome when compared to the person in the control group. In this context, "better outcome" is defined holistically, based on information collected across multiple health facets (e.g. mortality, symptom reduction, and quality of life). Such approaches are highly applicable to stroke research. They are a direct extension of "Tournament Methods" that are already used to analyze modified Rankin Scale data, and several stroke trials have already adopted this new approach to better reflect the multifaceted nature of stroke. Despite this, there is little guidance available to stroke researchers who wish to make use of the approach.

Results: This article provides a review of how to effectively use Tournament Methods to reflect the multifaceted nature of stroke. We review how Tournament Methods may be used to estimate treatment effects that simultaneously consider multiple clinical outcomes. We describe methods that have been used within stroke to combine multiple clinical outcomes for Tournament Methods analysis, provide an overview of the effect size measure estimates commonly used to summarize treatment effects, and discuss both available statistical methods and software for the analysis, visualization, and reporting of Win Statistics. We provide practical recommendations for conducting and reporting statistical analyses under the Tournament Methods approach using published stroke trials as illustrative examples. We further present newly developed point-and-click software that provides easy access to statistical codes for conducting Tournament Methods analyses and facilitates the use of our recommendations. This software can be downloaded from https://github.com/HannahJohns/compare-wins.

Conclusion: Tournament Methods are flexible and increasingly used within stroke research. We advocate for a principled approach to their use in the design and analysis of stroke trials to better reflect the multifaceted nature of health care.

实际指导赢统计和比赛方法在中风研究多方面的结果:审查和建议。
大多数中风试验通常使用反映单一关注点的结果测量,如功能结果或神经系统改善。这种重点反映临床现实的整体性质的能力有限,在临床现实中,健康的多个方面都很重要。在Win Statistics方法发展的推动下,其他临床领域越来越多地采用更好地反映健康结果的多面性的替代方法。这些方法比较了治疗组与对照组中所有可能的患者对的结果,并将治疗效果总结为这些比较的比例组合,其中治疗组的患者与对照组的患者相比结果更好/更差。在这方面,“更好的结果”是根据从多个健康方面(例如死亡率、症状减轻和生活质量)收集的信息进行整体定义的。这些方法非常适用于中风研究。它们是“锦标赛方法”的直接延伸,“锦标赛方法”已经被用于分析修改后的兰金量表数据,一些中风试验已经采用了这种新方法,以更好地反映中风的多面性。尽管如此,对于希望利用这种方法的中风研究人员来说,几乎没有什么指导。这篇文章提供了如何有效地使用比赛方法来反映斯托克城的多面性的回顾。我们回顾了锦标赛方法如何用于评估同时考虑多种临床结果的治疗效果。我们描述了在卒中中使用的方法,将多个临床结果结合起来进行锦标赛方法分析,概述了通常用于总结治疗效果的效应大小测量估计,并讨论了用于分析、可视化和Win Statistics报告的可用统计方法和软件。我们使用已发表的中风试验作为说明性例子,为在锦标赛方法下进行和报告统计分析提供实用建议。我们进一步介绍了新开发的点击式软件,可以方便地访问进行比赛方法分析的统计代码,并方便使用我们的建议。
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
International Journal of Stroke
International Journal of Stroke 医学-外周血管病
CiteScore
13.90
自引率
6.00%
发文量
132
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal of Stroke is a welcome addition to the international stroke journal landscape in that it concentrates on the clinical aspects of stroke with basic science contributions in areas of clinical interest. Reviews of current topics are broadly based to encompass not only recent advances of global interest but also those which may be more important in certain regions and the journal regularly features items of news interest from all parts of the world. To facilitate the international nature of the journal, our Associate Editors from Europe, Asia, North America and South America coordinate segments of the journal.
×
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
小红书