[用于比较有效性研究的真实世界数据:评估德国的可用数据源,特别是关于登记的数据]。

IF 1.4 Q4 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Malik Cakir , Paula Starke , Alexandra Nolting , Wendi Qu , Dawid Pieper , Tim Mathes
{"title":"[用于比较有效性研究的真实世界数据:评估德国的可用数据源,特别是关于登记的数据]。","authors":"Malik Cakir ,&nbsp;Paula Starke ,&nbsp;Alexandra Nolting ,&nbsp;Wendi Qu ,&nbsp;Dawid Pieper ,&nbsp;Tim Mathes","doi":"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.01.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Using real-world data (RWD) for comparative effectiveness research has gained increasing attention. Real-world data is usually not collected with the primary aim of answering questions about the comparative effectiveness of medical interventions. Therefore, data collection is often not optimally designed for this purpose. For this reason, using it can be associated with several data-related or analysis-related problems.</div><div>This article has two aims: First of all, we will outline the basic requirements for comparative non-randomized studies based on RWD. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of potentially eligible RWD in Germany will be considered. In particular, the use of registry data will be discussed, as these currently appear to be the most suitable for comparing the effectiveness of interventions.</div><div>There are now various databases in Germany that contain RWD and can potentially be used for comparative effectiveness research. If they contain all the necessary information and if the data are of sufficient quality, they could offer a timely and efficient way of determining the effectiveness of medical interventions. However, our analysis shows that the use of this data is sometimes associated with considerable limitations. RWD is often highly aggregated and thus may not be sufficiently detailed to select the subjects precisely or to emulate the intervention or control interventions satisfactorily. In addition, many data sources only encompass a limited set of variables and limited time horizons (e.g., only hospitalization) according to their intended purpose (e.g., billing). Therefore, it is often questionable whether this includes all endpoints on benefit and harm that are important for the assessment and whether sufficiently long observation horizons/follow-up periods are given. Similarly, it is often questionable whether all necessary data to avoid bias are included. Furthermore, it is often difficult to assess suitability in advance due to the lack of available information.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":46628,"journal":{"name":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","volume":"194 ","pages":"Pages 1-7"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Versorgungsnahe Daten zur Bewertung der vergleichenden Effektivität von medizinischen Behandlungen: eine Bestandsaufnahme der verfügbaren Datenquellen in Deutschland unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Registern\",\"authors\":\"Malik Cakir ,&nbsp;Paula Starke ,&nbsp;Alexandra Nolting ,&nbsp;Wendi Qu ,&nbsp;Dawid Pieper ,&nbsp;Tim Mathes\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.zefq.2025.01.008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Using real-world data (RWD) for comparative effectiveness research has gained increasing attention. Real-world data is usually not collected with the primary aim of answering questions about the comparative effectiveness of medical interventions. Therefore, data collection is often not optimally designed for this purpose. For this reason, using it can be associated with several data-related or analysis-related problems.</div><div>This article has two aims: First of all, we will outline the basic requirements for comparative non-randomized studies based on RWD. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of potentially eligible RWD in Germany will be considered. In particular, the use of registry data will be discussed, as these currently appear to be the most suitable for comparing the effectiveness of interventions.</div><div>There are now various databases in Germany that contain RWD and can potentially be used for comparative effectiveness research. If they contain all the necessary information and if the data are of sufficient quality, they could offer a timely and efficient way of determining the effectiveness of medical interventions. However, our analysis shows that the use of this data is sometimes associated with considerable limitations. RWD is often highly aggregated and thus may not be sufficiently detailed to select the subjects precisely or to emulate the intervention or control interventions satisfactorily. In addition, many data sources only encompass a limited set of variables and limited time horizons (e.g., only hospitalization) according to their intended purpose (e.g., billing). Therefore, it is often questionable whether this includes all endpoints on benefit and harm that are important for the assessment and whether sufficiently long observation horizons/follow-up periods are given. Similarly, it is often questionable whether all necessary data to avoid bias are included. Furthermore, it is often difficult to assess suitability in advance due to the lack of available information.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46628,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen\",\"volume\":\"194 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 1-7\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1865921725000480\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Zeitschrift fur Evidenz Fortbildung und Qualitaet im Gesundheitswesen","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1865921725000480","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

利用真实世界数据(RWD)进行比较有效性研究已受到越来越多的关注。收集真实世界的数据通常不是为了回答有关医疗干预措施相对有效性的问题。因此,数据收集通常不是为此目的而优化设计的。由于这个原因,使用它可能与几个与数据或分析相关的问题相关联。本文有两个目的:首先,我们将概述基于RWD的比较非随机研究的基本要求。此外,将考虑在德国可能符合条件的RWD的优缺点。特别是,将讨论登记数据的使用,因为这些数据目前似乎是比较干预措施有效性的最合适的方法。现在德国有各种数据库包含RWD,可以潜在地用于比较有效性研究。如果它们包含所有必要的信息,如果数据具有足够的质量,它们可以提供一种及时和有效的方法来确定医疗干预措施的有效性。然而,我们的分析表明,这些数据的使用有时存在相当大的局限性。RWD通常是高度汇总的,因此可能不够详细,无法精确地选择受试者或令人满意地模拟干预或控制干预。此外,许多数据源根据其预期用途(例如,计费)仅包含一组有限的变量和有限的时间范围(例如,仅住院)。因此,这是否包括对评估很重要的益处和危害的所有终点,以及是否给出了足够长的观察视野/随访期,常常值得怀疑。同样,是否包括所有必要的数据以避免偏见也常常值得怀疑。此外,由于缺乏可用信息,往往难以事先评估其适用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Versorgungsnahe Daten zur Bewertung der vergleichenden Effektivität von medizinischen Behandlungen: eine Bestandsaufnahme der verfügbaren Datenquellen in Deutschland unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Registern
Using real-world data (RWD) for comparative effectiveness research has gained increasing attention. Real-world data is usually not collected with the primary aim of answering questions about the comparative effectiveness of medical interventions. Therefore, data collection is often not optimally designed for this purpose. For this reason, using it can be associated with several data-related or analysis-related problems.
This article has two aims: First of all, we will outline the basic requirements for comparative non-randomized studies based on RWD. In addition, the advantages and disadvantages of potentially eligible RWD in Germany will be considered. In particular, the use of registry data will be discussed, as these currently appear to be the most suitable for comparing the effectiveness of interventions.
There are now various databases in Germany that contain RWD and can potentially be used for comparative effectiveness research. If they contain all the necessary information and if the data are of sufficient quality, they could offer a timely and efficient way of determining the effectiveness of medical interventions. However, our analysis shows that the use of this data is sometimes associated with considerable limitations. RWD is often highly aggregated and thus may not be sufficiently detailed to select the subjects precisely or to emulate the intervention or control interventions satisfactorily. In addition, many data sources only encompass a limited set of variables and limited time horizons (e.g., only hospitalization) according to their intended purpose (e.g., billing). Therefore, it is often questionable whether this includes all endpoints on benefit and harm that are important for the assessment and whether sufficiently long observation horizons/follow-up periods are given. Similarly, it is often questionable whether all necessary data to avoid bias are included. Furthermore, it is often difficult to assess suitability in advance due to the lack of available information.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
18.20%
发文量
129
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信