Methodological review showed correct absolute effect size estimates for time-to-event outcomes in less than one-third of cancer-related systematic reviews
- PMID: 30543910
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.12.006
Methodological review showed correct absolute effect size estimates for time-to-event outcomes in less than one-third of cancer-related systematic reviews
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate in how many cancer-related Cochrane reviews hazard ratio (HR)-based absolute effects in summary of findings (SoF) tables have been correctly calculated and reported.
Study design and setting: We identified all Cochrane cancer intervention reviews that reported an HR for at least one outcome and provided a SoF table, published between January 2011 and December 2017 in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.
Results: In 28 reviews (29%) of 96 included Cochrane reviews, absolute effects in the SoF tables were calculated in a correct manner. In 23 reviews (24%), absolute effects had been correctly calculated, but there was no explanation given why authors calculated event-free survival (e.g., overall survival) throughout the review but reported number of events in SoF tables (e.g., death). Twelve reviews (13%) provided incorrect absolute effects. For seven reviews (7%), it was unclear if absolute effects were correctly calculated. In 26 (27%) reviews, no absolute effects based on the given HR were calculated.
Conclusions: In less than one-third of cancer-related Cochrane reviews, absolute effect size estimates were correctly calculated and reported. There is a need for guidance on how to calculate and report absolute effect estimates based on HR data.
Keywords: Absolute effects; Hazard ratio; Methodological; Review; Summary of findings; Time-to-event.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
GRADE guidelines 27: how to calculate absolute effects for time-to-event outcomes in summary of findings tables and Evidence Profiles.J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Feb;118:124-131. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.10.015. Epub 2019 Nov 9. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020. PMID: 31711910
-
[GRADE guidelines: 12. Developing Summary of Findings tables - dichotomous outcomes].Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2013;107(9-10):646-64. doi: 10.1016/j.zefq.2013.10.034. Epub 2013 Nov 9. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2013. PMID: 24315336 German.
-
A methodological survey of the analysis, reporting and interpretation of Absolute Risk ReductiOn in systematic revieWs (ARROW): a study protocol.Syst Rev. 2013 Dec 13;2:113. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-2-113. Syst Rev. 2013. PMID: 24330779 Free PMC article.
-
Systematic reviews experience major limitations in reporting absolute effects.J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Apr;72:16-26. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.11.002. Epub 2015 Nov 10. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016. PMID: 26560992
-
Towards core outcome set (COS) development: a follow-up descriptive survey of outcomes in Cochrane reviews.Syst Rev. 2015 May 19;4:73. doi: 10.1186/s13643-015-0060-0. Syst Rev. 2015. PMID: 25987294 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Exploring the characteristics, methods and reporting of systematic reviews with meta-analyses of time-to-event outcomes: a meta-epidemiological study.BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024 Nov 25;24(1):291. doi: 10.1186/s12874-024-02401-4. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024. PMID: 39587509 Free PMC article.
-
First-line therapy for adults with advanced renal cell carcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023 May 4;5(5):CD013798. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013798.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2023. PMID: 37146227 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources