Quantification of the External Validity of Randomized Controlled Trials Supporting Clinical Care Guidelines: The Case of Thromboprophylaxis

被引:0
作者
Abdallah, Sami Morin-Ben [1 ]
Dutilleul, Aurore [1 ]
Nadon, Valerie [1 ]
Yang, Ji Wei [1 ]
Marchand-Senecal, Xavier [1 ]
Nguyen, Paul Van [1 ]
Lamarre-Cliche, Maxime [1 ]
Wistaff, Robert [1 ]
Kolan, Christophe [1 ]
Laskine, Mikhael [1 ]
Durand, Madeleine [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Montreal, Ctr Rech, Ctr Hosp, 3840 St Urbain St, Montreal, PQ H2V 3B3, Canada
关键词
American College of Chest Physicians guidelines; Exclusion criteria; External validity; Medical hospitalized patients; Padua score; Pharmacological thromboprophylaxis; Risk scores; MOLECULAR-WEIGHT HEPARIN; HOSPITALIZED MEDICAL PATIENTS; DEEP-VEIN THROMBOSIS; VENOUS THROMBOEMBOLISM; PREVENTION; PLACEBO; PROPHYLAXIS; INPATIENTS; MORTALITY; RISK;
D O I
10.1016/j.amjmed.2016.02.016
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines are based on the results of several randomized controlled trials. However, due to the stringent exclusion criteria of these trials, their external validity may be low. We aimed to evaluate the external validity of the randomized controlled trials cited in the American College of Chest Physicians guidelines for the use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in hospitalized medical patients. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, chart-review study of a random sample of patients admitted between July 1, 2013 and June 30, 2014 to the Internal Medicine ward of a large Canadian teaching university hospital. We identified the proportion of our population presenting exclusion criteria used in the randomized controlled trials cited in support of clinical care guidelines on thromboprophylaxis in the medical setting. RESULTS: Nine trials were identified for a total of 28,793 included patients following 23 distinct exclusion criteria. We included 429 patients. Median age was 65 years (interquartile ratio 51-77 years), and 236 (55%) were males. Of those not already anticoagulated at admission (n = 351), between 26% and 67% (weighted average, 51%) of our population presented at least one exclusion criterion, making them ineligible to be enrolled in randomized controlled trials. When restricting our population to patients with an indication for thromboprophylaxis based on a Padua risk score at admission >= 4, 21% to 76% (weighted average 55%) were ineligible to be enrolled in individual trials. CONCLUSIONS: Our cross-sectional study illustrates that the external validity of randomized controlled trials cited in the guidelines was low in our population, and lower when applying the risk-stratification tool recommended by guidelines. This can bias the clinicians toward treating patients that were not represented in the supporting evidence. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:740 / 745
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] External validity of randomized controlled trials in COPD
    Travers, Justin
    Marsh, Suzanne
    Caldwell, Brent
    Williams, Mathew
    Aldington, Sarah
    Weatherall, Mark
    Shirtcliffe, Philippa
    Beasley, Richard
    RESPIRATORY MEDICINE, 2007, 101 (06) : 1313 - 1320
  • [2] The external validity of published randomized controlled trials in primary care
    Ritu Jones
    Robert O Jones
    Colin McCowan
    Alan A Montgomery
    Tom Fahey
    BMC Family Practice, 10
  • [3] Examination of External Validity in Randomized Controlled Trials for Adjuvant Treatment of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma
    Sorg, Carolin
    Schmidt, Jan
    Buechler, Markus W.
    Edler, Lutz
    Maerten, Angela
    PANCREAS, 2009, 38 (05) : 542 - 550
  • [4] Generalization in the Tropics - Development Policy, Randomized Controlled Trials, and External Validity
    Peters, Joerg
    Langbein, Joerg
    Roberts, Gareth
    WORLD BANK RESEARCH OBSERVER, 2018, 33 (01) : 34 - 64
  • [5] Adherence to CONSORT Guidelines and Reporting of the Determinants of External Validity in Clinical Oncology Randomized Controlled Trials: A Review of Trials Published in Four Major Journals between 2013 and 2015
    Audet, Sophie
    Doyle, Catherine
    Lemieux, Christopher
    Tardif, Marc-Antoine
    Gauvreau, Andrea
    Simonyan, David
    Nabi, Hermann
    Lemieux, Julie
    CURRENT ONCOLOGY, 2023, 30 (02) : 2061 - 2072
  • [6] Consensus on the definition and assessment of external validity of randomized controlled trials: A Delphi study
    Jung, Andres
    Braun, Tobias
    Armijo-Olivo, Susan
    Challoumas, Dimitris
    Luedtke, Kerstin
    RESEARCH SYNTHESIS METHODS, 2024, 15 (02) : 288 - 302
  • [7] Policy evaluation, randomized controlled trials, and external validity-A systematic review
    Peters, Joerg
    Langbein, Joerg
    Roberts, Gareth
    ECONOMICS LETTERS, 2016, 147 : 51 - 54
  • [8] Primary Thromboprophylaxis in Ambulatory Pancreatic Cancer Patients Receiving Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
    Frere, Corinne
    Crichi, Benjamin
    Bournet, Barbara
    Canivet, Cindy
    Abdallah, Nassim Ait
    Buscail, Louis
    Farge, Dominique
    CANCERS, 2020, 12 (08) : 1 - 16
  • [9] The relationship between external and internal validity of randomized controlled trials: A sample of hypertension trials from China
    Zhang, Xin
    Wu, Yuxia
    Ren, Pengwei
    Liu, Xueting
    Kang, Deying
    CONTEMPORARY CLINICAL TRIALS COMMUNICATIONS, 2015, 1 : 32 - 38
  • [10] No effectiveness of anticoagulants for thromboprophylaxis after non-major knee arthroscopy: a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
    Zheng, Gang
    Tang, Qian
    Shang, Ping
    Pan, Xiao-Yun
    Liu, Hai-Xiao
    JOURNAL OF THROMBOSIS AND THROMBOLYSIS, 2018, 45 (04) : 562 - 570