Bhatty Asad, Wilkinson Chris, Aktaa Suleman, Batra Gorav, Beska Benjamin, Khaing Phyo H, Wahab Ali, Raveendra Keerthenan, Taha Ahmed, Nadarajah Ramesh, Bhatt Deepak L, Stables Rod, Camm John, Kharbanda Rajesh K, Newby David E, Petrie Mark C, Wu Jianhua, Sydes Matthew R, Gale Chris P
Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
Leeds Institute for Data Analytics, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK.
Heart. 2025 Jun 27. doi: 10.1136/heartjnl-2025-326045.
Outcome measure choice and definition can determine the result of the study. We describe outcome measures and their definitions for cardiovascular studies in highly cited medical journals.
Cardiovascular phase III or IV randomised clinical trials (RCTs) or multicentre observational studies published in the , or between 1 January 2013 and 6 June 2024 from Embase and Ovid Medline were included. Two independent reviewers selected the studies and extracted the primary and secondary outcome measures from each publication.
386 studies (83% RCTs; 17% observational) representing 10 699 147 participants were included. Studies investigated coronary heart disease (51%), cardiomyopathy/heart failure (22%), heart rhythm disease (15%), valvular heart disease (11%) and 'other' cardiovascular diseases (1%), with 45% investigating a device and 48% funded by industry. The most frequently reported primary outcome measure was a composite (63%), the most frequent component of which was myocardial infarction (58%). The use of a composite for the primary outcome measure increased from 49% of studies in 2013 to a peak of 85% in 2018. From 2013 to 2023, the median number of secondary outcome measures per study increased for RCTs (3-8) and observational studies (0-7). Definitions for cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction and stroke varied across the studies.
For cardiovascular studies published in highly cited journals, there has been an expansion in the use of primary composite outcome measures and secondary outcome measures, with heterogeneity in the definition of primary outcome measures. A standardised approach to the use of cardiovascular outcomes measures is required.
结局指标的选择和定义能够决定研究结果。我们描述了高影响力医学期刊中心血管研究的结局指标及其定义。
纳入2013年1月1日至2024年6月6日期间发表于Embase和Ovid Medline数据库的、 或 上的心血管III期或IV期随机临床试验(RCT)或多中心观察性研究。两名独立评审员筛选研究,并从每份出版物中提取主要和次要结局指标。
共纳入386项研究(83%为RCT;17%为观察性研究),涉及10699147名参与者。研究涉及冠心病(51%)、心肌病/心力衰竭(22%)、心律失常疾病(15%)、心脏瓣膜病(11%)和“其他”心血管疾病(1%),45%的研究涉及医疗器械,48%由行业资助。最常报告的主要结局指标是复合指标(63%),其中最常见的组成部分是心肌梗死(58%)。主要结局指标使用复合指标的比例从2013年的49%增至2018年的峰值85%。2013年至2023年,RCT(从3个增至8个)和观察性研究(从0个增至7个)每项研究的次要结局指标中位数均有所增加。心血管死亡率、心肌梗死和中风的定义在各项研究中存在差异。
对于发表在高影响力期刊上的心血管研究,主要复合结局指标和次要结局指标的使用有所增加,且主要结局指标的定义存在异质性。需要采用标准化方法来使用心血管结局指标。