ReviewBMC medical research methodology2025
Enhancing confidence in complex health technology assessments by using real-world evidence: highlighting existing strategies for effective drug evaluation.
Review in BMC medical research methodology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multi-omics-driven precision medicine.iMeta · 2026Review
- Key Real-World Data Management Practices for Registry Evaluation and Quality Assurance.Therapeutic innovation & regulatory science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for evaluating new therapies but have limitations, notably in terms of external validity. Real-world data (RWD) studies could complement RCT evidence. However, a consensus has not yet been reached on situations where RWD could offer rigorous complementary evidence to an RCT when evaluating the effectiveness of therapeutic innovations. This research aims to: (1) propose a categorisation of complex clinical situations; (2) classify the real-world evidence (RWE) approaches to be used in each situation to help reduce uncertainties or provide further evidence in drug benefit assessments; (3) summarise the best methodological considerations to adopt when using these RWE approaches; and (4) propose general recommendations to increase confidence in the use of RWE approaches during the assessment process. The main recommendations within the framework around the RWD-generation plan for complex evaluations are related to four main issues: quality (establishing criteria and standards for quality data), methodology (ensuring the use of the best methodological approaches), transparency (from the industry and from the health technology agencies (HTAs) and sharing/collaborating across countries and HTAs (promoting collaboration between HTAs and involving all parties). Our proposal and recommendations could help the scientific community better consider the therapeutic value of innovations through RWD, so that their potential can be fully realised to benefit the quality of care and the regulation of the healthcare system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.