Exploring changes over time and characteristics associated with data retrieval across individual participant data meta-analyses: Systematic review

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 357, Issue , 2017, Pages

  Nevitt, Sarah J ^a   Marson, Anthony G ^a   Davie, Becky ^a   Reynolds, Sally ^a   Williams, Lisa ^a   Smith, Catrin Tudur ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; DATA BASE; FUNDING; HUMAN; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; MEDICAL LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RESEARCH SUBJECT; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; PROCEDURES; TRENDS;

HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH SUBJECTS;

EID: 85017106264     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.j1390     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Burns PB, Rohrich RJ, Chung KC. The levels of evidence and their role in evidence-based medicine. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011;128:305-10. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e318219c171.
2. Lambert PC, Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR. A comparison of summary patient-level covariates in meta-regression with individual patient data meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2002;55:86-94. doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(01)00414-0.
3. Sutton AJ, Duval SJ, Tweedie RL, Abrams KR, Jones DR. Empirical assessment of effect of publication bias on meta-analyses. BMJ 2000;320:1574-7. doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7249.1574.
4. Kirkham JJ, Dwan KM, Altman DG, et al. The impact of outcome reporting bias in randomised controlled trials on a cohort of systematic reviews. BMJ 2010;340:c365. doi:10.1136/bmj.c365.
5. Stewart LA, Tierney JF. To IPD or not to IPD? Advantages and disadvantages of systematic reviews using individual patient data. Eval Health Prof 2002;25:76-97. doi:10.1177/0163278702025001006.
6. Stewart LA, Clarke MJ. Cochrane Working Group. Practical methodology of meta-analyses (overviews) using updated individual patient data. Stat Med 1995;14:2057-79. doi:10.1002/sim.4780141902.
7. Stewart LA, Parmar MK. Meta-analysis of the literature or of individual patient data: is there a difference?Lancet 1993;341:418-22. doi:10.1016/0140-6736(93)93004-K.
8. Tudur Smith C, Marcucci M, Nolan SJ, et al. Individual participant data meta-analyses compared with meta-analyses based on aggregate data. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;9:MR000007. doi:10.1002/14651858.MR000007.pub3.
9. Simmonds M, Stewart G, Stewart L. A decade of individual participant data meta-analyses: A review of current practice. Contemp Clin Trials 2015;45(Pt A):76-83. doi:10.1016/j.cct.2015.06.012.
10. Riley RD, Lambert PC, Abo-Zaid G. Meta-analysis of individual participant data: rationale, conduct, and reporting. BMJ 2010;340:c221. doi:10.1136/bmj.c221.
11. Huang Y, Mao C, Yuan J, et al. Distribution and epidemiological characteristics of published individual patient data meta-analyses. PLoS One 2014;9:e100151. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0100151.
12. Tierney JF, Pignon JP, Gueffyier F, et al. Cochrane IPD Meta-analysis Methods Group. How individual participant data meta-analyses have influenced trial design, conduct, and analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2015;68:1325-35. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.05.024.
13. Vale CL, Rydzewska LH, Rovers MM, Emberson JR, Gueyffier F, Stewart LA. Cochrane IPD Meta-analysis Methods Group. Uptake of systematic reviews and meta-analyses based on individual participant data in clinical practice guidelines: descriptive study. BMJ 2015;350:h1088. doi:10.1136/bmj.h1088.
14. Riley RD, Simmonds MC, Look MP. Evidence synthesis combining individual patient data and aggregate data: a systematic review identified current practice and possible methods. J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:431-9. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.09.009.
15. Ahmed I, Sutton AJ, Riley RD. Assessment of publication bias, selection bias, and unavailable data in meta-analyses using individual participant data: a database survey. BMJ 2012;344:d7762. doi:10.1136/bmj.d7762.
16. Jaspers GJ, Degraeuwe PL. A failed attempt to conduct an individual patient data meta-analysis. Syst Rev 2014;3:97. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-3-97.
17. Hróbjartsson A. Why did it take 19 months to retrieve clinical trial data from a non-profit organisation? BMJ 2013;347:f6927. doi:10.1136/bmj.f6927.
18. Savage CJ, Vickers AJ. Empirical study of data sharing by authors publishing in PLoS journals. PLoS One 2009;4:e7078. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0007078.
19. Vickers AJ. Whose data set is it anyway? Sharing raw data from randomized trials. Trials 2006;7:15. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-7-15.
20. Simmonds MC, Higgins JP, Stewart LA, Tierney JF, Clarke MJ, Thompson SG. Meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomized trials: a review of methods used in practice. Clin Trials 2005;2:209-17. doi:10.1191/1740774505cn087oa.
21. Rathi VK, Strait KM, Gross CP, et al. Predictors of clinical trial data sharing: exploratory analysis of a cross-sectional survey. Trials 2014;15:384. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-15-384.
22. Rathi V, Dzara K, Gross CP, et al. Sharing of clinical trial data among trialists: a cross sectional survey. BMJ 2012;345:e7570. doi:10.1136/bmj.e7570.
23. Institute of Medicine (IOM) Committee on Strategies for Responsible Sharing of Clinical Trial Data. Sharing Clinical Trial Data: Maximizing Benefits. Minimizing Risk, 2015.
24. European Medicines Agency. European Medicines Agency policy on publication of clinical data for medicinal products for human use (POLICY/0070). 2014.
25. Taichman DB, Backus J, Baethge C, et al. Sharing Clinical Trial Data-A Proposal from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. N Engl J Med 2016;374:384-6. doi:10.1056/NEJMe1515172.
26. Zarin DA. Participant-level data and the new frontier in trial transparency. N Engl J Med 2013;369:468-9. doi:10.1056/NEJMe1307268.
27. Tudur Smith C, Hopkins C, Sydes MR, et al. How should individual participant data (IPD) from publicly funded clinical trials be shared?BMC Med 2015;13:298. doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0532-z.
28. Nisen P, Rockhold F. Access to patient-level data from GlaxoSmithKline clinical trials. N Engl J Med 2013;369:475-8. doi:10.1056/NEJMsr1302541.
29. https://clinicalstudydatarequest.com/ (Accessed 20/04/2016) [Internet].
30. Geifman N, Bollyky J, Bhattacharya S, Butte AJ. Opening clinical trial data: are the voluntary data-sharing portals enough?BMC Med 2015;13:280. doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0525-y.
31. Strom BL, Buyse M, Hughes J, Knoppers BM. Data sharing, year 1-access to data from industry-sponsored clinical trials. N Engl J Med 2014;371:2052-4. doi:10.1056/NEJMp1411794.
32. Homer P, Gross M. Data Unleashed: Cooperation Among Competitors. Pharmaceutical Executive. 2016 April 27 2016.
33. Mayo-Wilson E, Doshi P, Dickersin K. Are manufacturers sharing data as promised? BMJ 2015;351:h4169. doi:10.1136/bmj.h4169.
34. Marson AG, Williamson PR, Hutton JL, Clough HE, Chadwick DW. Carbamazepine versus valproate monotherapy for epilepsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2000;(3):CD001030.
35. Nolan SJ, Sudell M, Tudur Smith C, Marson AG. Topiramate versus carbamazepine monotherapy for epilepsy: an individual participant data review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;12:CD012065.
36. Nolan SJ, Marson AG, Weston J, Tudur Smith C. Phenytoin versus valproate monotherapy for partial onset seizures and generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures: an individual participant data review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;4:CD001769.
37. Nolan SJ, Tudur Smith C, Pulman J, Marson AG. Phenobarbitone versus phenytoin monotherapy for partial onset seizures and generalised onset tonic-clonic seizures. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;1:CD002217.
38. Nolan SJ, Muller M, Tudur Smith C, Marson AG. Oxcarbazepine versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;5:CD003615.
39. Nolan SJ, Tudur Smith C, Weston J. A.G.M. Lamotrigine versus carbamazepine monotherapy for epilepsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;(11):CD001031.
40. Nolan SJ, Marson AG, Weston J, Tudur Smith C. Carbamazepine versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy: an individual participant data review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015;8:CD001911.
41. Nolan SJ, Marson AG, Weston J, Tudur Smith C. Carbamazepine versus phenobarbitone monotherapy for epilepsy: an individual participant data review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015;7:CD001904.
42. Nolan SJ, Sudell M, Weston J, Tudur Smith C, Marson AG. Antiepileptic drug monotherapy for epilepsy: a network meta-analysis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014;(12):CD011412.
43. International League Against Epilepsy. Considerations on designing clinical trials to evaluate the place of new antiepileptic drugs in the treatment of newly diagnosed and chronic patients with epilepsy. Epilepsia 1998;39:799-803. doi:10.1111/j.1528-1157.1998.tb01167.x.
44. Williamson PR, Marson AG, Tudur C, Hutton JL, Chadwick D. Individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized anti-epileptic drug monotherapy trials. J Eval Clin Pract 2000;6:205-14. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2753.2000.00236.x.
45. Tudur Smith C, Marson AG, Chadwick DW, Williamson PR. Multiple treatment comparisons in epilepsy monotherapy trials. Trials 2007;8:34. doi:10.1186/1745-6215-8-34.
46. Tudur Smith C, Marson AG, Williamson PR. Carbamazepine versus phenobarbitone monotherapy for epilepsy[Review] [21 refs]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003;(1):CD001904.
47. Tudur Smith C, Marson AG, Clough HE, Williamson PR. Carbamazepine versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy[Review] [47 refs]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2002;(2):CD001911.
48. Tudur Smith C, Marson AG, Williamson PR. Phenytoin versus valproate monotherapy for partial onset seizures and generalized onset tonic-clonic seizures[Review] [40 refs]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001;(4):CD001769.
49. Taylor S, Tudur Smith C, Williamson PR, Marson AG. Phenobarbitone versus phenytoin monotherapy for partial onset seizures and generalized onset tonic-clonic seizures[Review] [16 refs]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001;(4):CD002217.
50. Muller M, Marson AG, Williamson PR. Oxcarbazepine versus phenytoin monotherapy for epilepsy[Review] [20 refs]. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;(2):CD003615.
51. Gamble CL, Williamson PR, Marson AG. Lamotrigine versus carbamazepine monotherapy for epilepsy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;(1):CD001031.
52. Marson AG, Al-Kharusi AM, Alwaidh M, et al. SANAD Study group. The SANAD study of effectiveness of carbamazepine, gabapentin, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, or topiramate for treatment of partial epilepsy: an unblinded randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2007;369:1000-15. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60460-7.
53. Marson AG, Al-Kharusi AM, Alwaidh M, et al. SANAD Study group. The SANAD study of effectiveness of valproate, lamotrigine, or topiramate for generalised and unclassifiable epilepsy: an unblinded randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2007;369:1016-26. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60461-9.
54. Debray TP, Moons KG, van Valkenhoef G, et al. GetReal Methods Review Group. Get real in individual participant data (IPD) meta-analysis: a review of the methodology. Res Synth Methods 2015;6:293-309. doi:10.1002/jrsm.1160.
55. European Union Clinical Trials Directive. Directive 2001/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April 2001 on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use. 2001.
56. Zanchetti A, Mancia G. Searching for information from unreported trials-amnesty for the past and prospective meta-analyses for the future. J Hypertens 1998;16:125. doi:10.1097/00004872-199816020-00001.
57. Stewart LA, Clarke M, Rovers M, et al. PRISMA-IPD Development Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses of individual participant data: the PRISMA-IPD Statement. JAMA 2015;313:1657-65. doi:10.1001/jama.2015.3656.
58. Tierney JF, Vale C, Riley R, et al. Individual Participant Data (IPD) Meta-analyses of Randomised Controlled Trials: Guidance on Their Use. PLoS Med 2015;12:e1001855. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001855.
59. Booth A, Clarke M, Dooley G, et al. The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: an international prospective register of systematic reviews. Syst Rev 2012;1:2. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-1-2.