Department of Psychiatry, New York State Psychiatric Institute, Columbia University, New York, NY 10032, USA.
J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Aug;66(8 Suppl):S29-36. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.02.013.
A large body of comparative effectiveness research (CER) focuses on the use of observational and quasi-experimental approaches. We sought to examine the use of clinical trials as a tool for CER, particularly in mental health.
Examination of three ongoing randomized clinical trials in psychiatry addressing issues that would pose difficulties for nonexperimental CER methods.
Existing statistical approaches to nonexperimental data appear insufficient to compensate for biases that may arise when the pattern of missing data cannot be properly modeled such as when there are no standards for treatment, when affected populations have limited access to treatment, or when there are high rates of treatment dropout.
Clinical trials should retain an important role in CER, particularly in cases of high disorder prevalence, large expected effect sizes, difficult-to-reach populations, or when examining sequential treatments or stepped-care algorithms. Progress in CER on mental health will require careful consideration of appropriate selection between clinical trials and nonexperimental designs and on allocation of research resources to optimally inform key treatment decisions for each patient.
大量的比较效果研究(CER)侧重于使用观察性和准实验方法。我们试图研究临床试验作为 CER 工具的使用情况,特别是在心理健康方面。
对精神病学中正在进行的三项随机临床试验进行了检查,这些试验涉及到对于非实验性 CER 方法可能会有困难的问题。
对于无法正确建模缺失数据模式的情况,例如当没有治疗标准、受影响人群获得治疗的机会有限或治疗退出率较高时,现有的非实验数据的统计方法似乎不足以弥补可能出现的偏差。
临床试验应在 CER 中保留重要作用,特别是在疾病流行率高、预期效果大、难以接触到的人群,或在检查序贯治疗或阶梯式治疗算法时。在心理健康方面的 CER 取得进展,需要仔细考虑在临床试验和非实验设计之间进行适当的选择,并合理分配研究资源,以优化为每个患者提供关键治疗决策的信息。