Mediation analysis of the relationship between institutional research activity and patient survival

BMC Medical Research Methodology

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2014, Pages

  Rochon, Justine ^a   Du Bois, Andreas ^b   Lange, Theis ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

^b KLINIKEN ESSEN MITTE   (Germany)

^c UNIVERSITY OF COPENHAGEN   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Healthcare outcomes; Mediation; Research activity; Survival analysis; Trial effect

Indexed keywords

AGED; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INSTITUTIONAL CARE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; NEOPLASM; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; RESEARCH; STATISTICS; SURVIVAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

AGED; FEMALE; HUMANS; INSTITUTIONAL PRACTICE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASMS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RESEARCH; SURVIVAL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84892643283     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14712288     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-9     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Are randomized clinical trials good for us (in the short term)? Evidence for a 'trial effect'. Braunholtz DA, Edwards SJ, Lilford RJ, J Clin Epidemiol 2001 54 217 224 10.1016/S0895-4356(00)00305-X 11223318 (Pubitemid 32162034)
2. Comparison of outcomes in cancer patients treated within and outside clinical trials: conceptual framework and structured review. Peppercorn JM, Weeks JC, Cook EF, Joffe S, Lancet 2004 363 263 270 10.1016/S0140-6736(03)15383- 4 14751698 (Pubitemid 38142408)
3. Outcomes of patients who participate in randomized controlled trials compared to similar patients receiving similar interventions who do not participate. Vist GE, Bryant D, Somerville L, et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2008 3 MR000009
4. The impact of the process of clinical research on health service outcomes. Selby P, Autier P, Ann Oncol 2011 22 Suppl 7 &22ii5 vii9 22039145
5. Future research and methodological approaches. Pater J, Rochon J, Parmar M, Selby P, Ann Oncol 2011 22 Suppl 7 &22ii57 vii61 22039148
6. Effects on patients of their healthcare practitioner's or institution's participation in clinical trials: a systematic review. Clarke M, Loudon K, Trials 2011 12 16 10.1186/1745-6215-12-16 21251306
7. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Baron RM, Kenny DA, J Pers Soc Psychol 1986 51 1173 1182 3806354
8. Identifiability and exchangeability for direct and indirect effects. Robins JM, Greenland S, Epidemiology 1992 3 143 155 10.1097/00001648-199203000- 00013 1576220
9. Opening the Black Box: a motivation for the assessment of mediation. Hafeman DM, Schwartz S, Int J Epidemiol 2009 38 838 845 10.1093/ije/dyn372 19261660
10. Fallibility in estimating direct effects. Cole SR, Hernán MA, Int J Epidemiol 2002 31 163 165 10.1093/ije/31.1.163 11914314 (Pubitemid 34284920)
11. A further critique of the analytic strategy of adjusting for covariates to identify biologic mediation. Kaufman JS, Maclehose RF, Kaufman S, Epidemiol Perspect Innov 2004 1 4 10.1186/1742-5573-1-4 15507130 (Pubitemid 40404935)
12. Causal mediation analysis with survival data. VanderWeele TJ, Epidemiology 2011 22 582 585 10.1097/EDE.0b013e31821db37e 21642779
13. Pattern of care and impact of participation in clinical studies on the outcome in ovarian cancer. du Bois A, Rochon J, Lamparter C, Pfisterer J, Int J Gynecol Cancer 2005 15 183 191 10.1111/j.1525-1438.2005.15202.x 15823098 (Pubitemid 40396951)
14. Clinical research in epithelial ovarian cancer and patients' outcome. Rochon J, du Bois A, Ann Oncol 2011 22 Suppl 7 &22ii16 vii19 22039139
15. Maligne Ovarialtumoren. Bauknecht T, Breitbach GP, du Bois A, et al. Diagnose und Therapie maligner Erkrankungen. Kurzgefasste interdisziplinaere Leitlinien Muenchen: Zuckschwerdt Verlag, Hermanek P, 2000 301 318
16. R Core Team, R: A language and environment for statistical computing Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing 2013
17. A simple unified approach for estimating natural direct and indirect effects. Lange T, Vansteelandt S, Bekaert M, Am J Epidemiol 2012 176 190 195 10.1093/aje/kwr525 22781427
18. Pearl J, Causality: Models, Reasoning, and Inference New York, NY: Cambridge University Press 2009
19. Assessing natural direct and indirect effects through multiple pathways. Lange T, Rasmussen M, Thygesen LC, Am J Epidemiol 2014 179 513 518 10.1093/aje/kwt270 24264291
20. Randomized phase III trial of topotecan following carboplatin and paclitaxel in first-line treatment of advanced ovarian cancer: A gynecologic cancer intergroup trial of the AGO-OVAR and GINECO. Pfisterer J, Weber B, Reuss A, et al. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006 98 1036 1045 10.1093/jnci/djj296 16882940 (Pubitemid 44288151)
21. How may clinical research improve healthcare outcomes? Krzyzanowska MK, Kaplan R, Sullivan R, Ann Oncol 2011 22 Suppl 7 &22ii10 vii15 22039138
22. Age as a prognostic factor in ovarian carcinoma. The Gynecologic Oncology Group experience. Thigpen T, Brady MF, Omura GA, et al. Cancer 1993 71 2 Suppl 606 614 8420683
23. A prognostic model for ovarian cancer. Clark TG, Stewart ME, Altman DG, et al. Br J Cancer 2001 85 944 952 10.1054/bjoc.2001.2030 11592763 (Pubitemid 33015994)
24. Comorbidity is an independent prognostic factor for the survival of ovarian cancer: a Danish register-based cohort study from a clinical database. Sperling C, Noer MC, Christensen IJ, et al. Gynecol Oncol 2013 129 97 102 10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.12.039 23290990
25. The effect of socioeconomic status on the survival of ovarian cancer patients. Sugiyama VE, Shin JY, Kapp DS, et al. J Clin Oncol 2008 26 Suppl 5557
26. Disparities in ovarian cancer care quality and survival according to race and socioeconomic status. Bristow RE, Powell MA, Al-Hammadi N, et al. J Natl Canc Inst 2013 105 823 832 10.1093/jnci/djt065.