Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32581529›Full record

ReviewInternational journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease2020

Comparing Randomized Controlled Trials and Real-World Studies in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease Pharmacotherapy.

Donald P Tashkin, Alpesh N Amin, Edward M Kerwin

Abstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Generating real-world evidence in Alzheimer's disease: Considerations for establishing a core dataset.Alzheimer's & dementia : the journal of the Alzheimer's Association · 2024
    Article
  16. Observational
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Donald P TashkinThe Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Alpesh N AminDepartment of Medicine, School of Medicine University of California, Irvine, CA, USA.
Edward M KerwinCrisor, LLC Clinical Research Institute of Southern Oregon, Medford, OR, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Analytic epidemiological studies cover a large spectrum of study methodologies, ranging from noninterventional observational studies (population-based, case-control, or cohort studies) to interventional studies (clinical trials). Herein, we review the different research methodologies or study designs and discuss their advantages and disadvantages in the context of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) pharmacotherapy. Although randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the "gold standard" for evaluating the efficacy and safety of an intervention, observational studies conducted in a real-world scenario are useful in providing evidence on the effectiveness of the intervention in clinical practice; understanding both efficacy and effectiveness is important from the clinician's perspective. Pragmatic clinical trials that use real-world data while retaining randomization bridge the gap between explanatory RCTs and noninterventional observational studies. Overall, different study designs have their associated advantages and disadvantages; together, findings from all types of studies bring about progress in clinical research as elucidated through examples from COPD research in this paper.

Indexed as

Pulmonary Disease, Chronic ObstructiveCase-Control StudiesHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicResearch Designclinical trialsCOPDpharmacotherapystudy designs

Identifiers

PMID32581529
PMCPMC7276323

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.