Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands
Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, Netherlands.
BMJ. 2022 May 3;377:e070113. doi: 10.1136/bmj-2021-070113.
To provide considerations for reporting and interpretation that can improve assessment of the credibility of exploratory analyses in aetiologic research.
Mini-review of the literature and account of exploratory research principles.
This study focuses on a particular type of causal research, namely aetiologic studies, which investigate the causal effect of one or multiple risk factors on a particular health outcome or disease. The mini review included aetiologic research articles published in four epidemiology journals in the first issue of 2021: , , , and , specifically focusing on observational studies of causal risk factors of diseases.
Number of exposure-outcome associations reported, grouped by type of analysis (main, sensitivity, and additional).
The journal articles reported many exposure-outcome associations: a mean number of 33 (range 1-120) exposure-outcome associations for the primary analysis, 30 (0-336) for sensitivity analyses, and 163 (0-1467) for additional analyses. Six considerations were discussed that are important in assessing the credibility of exploratory analyses: research problem, protocol, statistical criteria, interpretation of findings, completeness of reporting, and effect of exploratory findings on future causal research.
Based on this mini-review, exploratory analyses in aetiologic research were not always reported properly. Six considerations for reporting of exploratory analyses in aetiologic research were provided to stimulate a discussion about their preferred handling and reporting. Researchers should take responsibility for the results of exploratory analyses by clearly reporting their exploratory nature and specifying which findings should be investigated in future research and how.
为报告和解释提供一些考虑因素，以提高对病因研究中探索性分析可信度的评估。
对文献进行小型回顾，并说明探索性研究原则。
本研究侧重于一种特定类型的因果研究，即病因研究，该研究调查一个或多个危险因素对特定健康结果或疾病的因果效应。小型综述包括 2021 年第一期《 》《 》《 》和《 》四本流行病学杂志上发表的病因研究文章，特别关注疾病因果风险因素的观察性研究。
按分析类型（主要、敏感性和附加）报告的暴露-结局关联数量。
期刊文章报告了许多暴露-结局关联：主要分析报告的平均暴露-结局关联数量为 33 个（范围 1-120 个），敏感性分析为 30 个（0-336 个），额外分析为 163 个（0-1467 个）。讨论了六点考虑因素，这些因素对于评估探索性分析的可信度非常重要：研究问题、方案、统计标准、结果解释、报告的完整性以及探索性发现对未来因果研究的影响。
基于这项小型综述，病因研究中的探索性分析报告并不总是恰当的。本文提供了六点关于病因研究中探索性分析报告的考虑因素，以激发关于其首选处理和报告方式的讨论。研究人员应通过明确报告其探索性本质，并指定应在未来研究中调查哪些发现以及如何调查，对探索性分析的结果负责。
