Practical guidance for using multiple data sources in systematic reviews and meta-analyses (with examples from the MUDS study)

Research Synthesis Methods

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2018, Pages 2-12

  Mayo Wilson, Evan ^a   Li, Tianjing ^a   Fusco, Nicole ^a   Dickersin, Kay ^a  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS BLOOMBERG SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

meta analysis; multiple data sources; reporting bias; risk of bias assessment; selective outcome reporting

Indexed keywords

4 AMINOBUTYRIC ACID; AMINE; CYCLOHEXANECARBOXYLIC ACID DERIVATIVE; GABAPENTIN; QUETIAPINE;

BIPOLAR DISORDER; CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; LITERATURE; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); NEURALGIA; RESEARCH; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

AMINES; BIPOLAR DISORDER; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; CYCLOHEXANECARBOXYLIC ACIDS; DATA COLLECTION; GAMMA-AMINOBUTYRIC ACID; HUMANS; INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; NEURALGIA; QUETIAPINE FUMARATE; RESEARCH REPORT; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 85041094950     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17592887     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1277     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Mayo-Wilson E, Hutfless S, Li T, et al. Integrating multiple data sources (MUDS) for meta-analysis to improve patient-centered outcomes research: a protocol for a systematic review. Syst Rev. 2015;4:143.
2. Mayo-Wilson E, Fusco N, Li T, et al. Multiple outcomes and analyses in clinical trials create challenges for interpretation and research synthesis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;86:39-50.
3. Mayo-Wilson E, Li T, Fusco N, et al. Cherry-picking by trialists and meta-analysts can drive conclusions about intervention efficacy. J Clin Epidemiol. In press;
4. Mullan RJ, Flynn DN, Carlberg B, et al. Systematic reviewers commonly contact study authors but do so with limited rigor. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(2):138-142.
5. Young T, Hopewell S. Methods for obtaining unpublished data. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;11:MR000027.
6. Institute of Medicine. Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011.
7. Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011.
8. ICH Expert Working Group. Structure and content of clinical study reports: international conference on harmonization of technical requirements for registration of pharmaceuticals for human use; 1995. http://www.ich.org/products/guidelines/efficacy/efficacy-single/article/structure-and-content-of-clinical-study-reports.html
9. Doshi P, Jefferson T. Clinical study reports of randomised controlled trials: an exploratory review of previously confidential industry reports. BMJ Open. 2013;3(2): pii:e002496.
10. Scherer RW, Langenberg P, von Elm E. Full publication of results initially presented in abstracts. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;2:MR000005.
11. Baudard M, Yavchitz A, Ravaud P, Perrodeau E, Boutron I. Impact of searching clinical trial registries in systematic reviews of pharmaceutical treatments: methodological systematic review and reanalysis of meta-analyses. BMJ. 2017;356:j448.
12. Sweeney M, Misha B, Wallace M, Freeman R. Effect of a once-daily gastroretentive formulation of gabapentin on the Brief Pain Inventory Scale scores in patients with postherpetic neuralgia. J Pain. 2012;13(4 suppl. 1):S71.
13. Saldanha IJ, Scherer RW, Rodriguez-Barraquer I, Jampel HD, Dickersin K. Dependability of results in conference abstracts of randomized controlled trials in ophthalmology and author financial conflicts of interest as a factor associated with full publication. Trials. 2016;17(1):213.
14. Ross JS, Mulvey GK, Hines EM, Nissen SE, Krumholz HM. Trial publication after registration in ClinicalTrials.gov: a cross-sectional analysis. PLoS Med. 2009;6(9):e1000144.
15. Jones CW, Keil LG, Holland WC, Caughey MC, Platts-Mills TF. Comparison of registered and published outcomes in randomized controlled trials: a systematic review. BMC Med. 2015;13:282.
16. Riveros C, Dechartres A, Perrodeau E, Haneef R, Boutron I, Ravaud P. Timing and completeness of trial results posted at ClinicalTrials.gov and published in journals. PLoS Med. 2013;10(12):e1001566; discussion e
17. Prayle AP, Hurley MN, Smyth AR. Compliance with mandatory reporting of clinical trial results on ClinicalTrials.gov: cross sectional study. BMJ. 2012;344:d7373.
18. Anderson ML, Chiswell K, Peterson ED, Tasneem A, Topping J, Califf RM. Compliance with results reporting at ClinicalTrials.gov. N Engl J Med. 2015;372(11):1031-1039.
19. Law MR, Kawasumi Y, Morgan SG. Despite law, fewer than one in eight completed studies of drugs and biologics are reported on time on ClinicalTrials.gov. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30(12):2338-2345.
20. Zarin DA, Tse T, Williams RJ, Rajakannan T. Update on trial registration 11 years after the ICMJE policy was established. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(4):383-391.
21. 42 CFR 11. Clinical trials registration and results information submission; Final rule. 2016.
22. Zarin DA, Tse T, Williams RJ, Carr S. Trial reporting in ClinicalTrials.gov—the final rule. N Engl J Med. 2016;
23. Turner EH. How to access and process FDA drug approval packages for use in research. BMJ. 2013;347:f5992.
24. Rising K, Bacchetti P, Bero L. Reporting bias in drug trials submitted to the Food and Drug Administration: review of publication and presentation. PLoS Med. 2008;5(11):e217.
25. Schwartz LM, Woloshin S, Zheng E, Tse T, Zarin DA. ClinicalTrials.gov and Drugs@FDA: a comparison of results reporting for new drug approval trials. Ann Intern Med. 2016;165(6):421-430.
26. Turner EH, Matthews AM, Linardatos E, Tell RA, Rosenthal R. Selective publication of antidepressant trials and its influence on apparent efficacy. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(3):252-260.
27. Turner EH, Knoepflmacher D, Shapley L. Publication bias in antipsychotic trials: an analysis of efficacy comparing the published literature to the US Food and Drug Administration database. PLoS Med. 2012;9(3):e1001189.
28. Food and Drug Administration (Center for Drug Evaluation and Research). Medical Review NDA 21-397. 2002.
29. Food and Drug Administration (Center for Drug Evaluation and Research). Statistical Review NDA 21-397. 2002.
30. Hudson KL, Lauer MS, Collins FS. Toward a new era of trust and transparency in clinical trials. JAMA. 2016;316(13):1353-1354.
31. National Institutes of Health. NIH policy on dissemination of NIH-funded clinical trial information. Fed Regist. 2016;81(183):
32. Wieseler B, Kerekes MF, Vervoelgyi V, McGauran N, Kaiser T. Impact of document type on reporting quality of clinical drug trials: a comparison of registry reports, clinical study reports, and journal publications. BMJ. 2012;344:d8141.
33. Golder S, Loke YK, Wright K, Norman G. Reporting of adverse events in published and unpublished studies of health care interventions: a systematic review. PLoS Med. 2016;13(9):e1002127.
34. Golder S, Loke YK, Wright K, Sterrantino C. Most systematic reviews of adverse effects did not include unpublished data. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;
35. Davis AL, Miller JD. The European Medicines Agency and Publication of Clinical Study Reports: a challenge for the US FDA. JAMA. 2017;317(9):905-906.
36. Wieland LS, Rutkow L, Vedula SS, et al. Who has used internal company documents for biomedical and public health research and where did they find them? PLoS One. 2014;9(5):e94709.
37. Doshi P, Dickersin K, Healy D, Vedula SS, Jefferson T. Restoring invisible and abandoned trials: a call for people to publish the findings. BMJ. 2013;346:f2865.
38. Stewart LA, Parmar MK. Meta-analysis of the literature or of individual patient data: is there a difference? Lancet. 1993;341(8842):418-422.
39. Mayo-Wilson E, Doshi P, Dickersin K. Are manufacturers sharing data as promised? BMJ. 2015;351:h4169.
40. Gotzsche PC. Multiple publication of reports of drug trials. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1989;36(5):429-432.
41. Tramer MR, Reynolds DJ, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Impact of covert duplicate publication on meta-analysis: a case study. BMJ. 1997;315(7109):635-640.
42. Scherer RW, Sieving PC, Ervin AM, Dickersin K. Can we depend on investigators to identify and register randomized controlled trials? PLoS One. 2012;7(9):e44183.
43. Cybulski L, Mayo-Wilson E, Grant S. Improving transparency and reproducibility through registration: the status of intervention trials published in clinical psychology journals. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2016;
44. Bashir R, Bourgeois FT, Dunn AG. A systematic review of the processes used to link clinical trial registrations to their published results. Syst Rev. 2017;6(1):123.
45. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.
46. Kirkham JJ, Altman DG, Williamson PR. Bias due to changes in specified outcomes during the systematic review process. PLoS One. 2010;5(3):e9810.
47. Saldanha IJ, Dickersin K, Wang X, Li T. Outcomes in Cochrane systematic reviews addressing four common eye conditions: an evaluation of completeness and comparability. PLoS One. 2014;9(10):e109400.
48. Zarin DA, Tse T, Williams RJ, Califf RM, Ide NC. The ClinicalTrials.gov results database—update and key issues. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(9):852-860.
49. Mayo-Wilson E, Fusco N, Li T, et al. Multiple outcomes and analyses in clinical trials create challenges for interpretation and research synthesis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;
50. Liu Z, Saldanha IJ, Margolis D, Dumville JC, Cullum NA. Outcomes in Cochrane systematic reviews related to wound care: an investigation into pre-specification. Wound Repair Regen. 2017;
51. Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;349:g7647.
52. Dwan K, Gamble C, Williamson PR, Kirkham JJ, Reporting Bias Group. Systematic review of the empirical evidence of study publication bias and outcome reporting bias—an updated review. PLoS One. 2013;8(7):e66844.
53. Vedula SS, Bero L, Scherer RW, Dickersin K. Outcome reporting in industry-sponsored trials of gabapentin for off-label use. N Engl J Med. 2009;361(20):1963-1971.
54. Coady SA, Mensah GA, Wagner EL, Goldfarb ME, Hitchcock DM, Giffen CA. Use of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Data Repository. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(19):1849-1858.
55. Strom BL, Buyse ME, Hughes J, Knoppers BM. Data sharing—is the juice worth the squeeze? N Engl J Med. 2016;375(17):1608-1609.
56. Taichman DB, Sahni P, Pinborg A, et al. Data sharing statements for clinical trials: a requirement of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. PLoS Med. 2017;14(6):e1002315.
57. Hoffmann T, Glasziou P, Beller E, Goldacre B, Chalmers I. Focus on sharing individual patient data distracts from other ways of improving trial transparency. BMJ. 2017;357:j2782.