Clinical research methods for treatment, diagnosis, prognosis, etiology, screening, and prevention: A narrative review
Corresponding Author
Xiaomei Yao
Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Center for Clinical Practice Guideline Conduction and Evaluation, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, P.R. China
Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Correspondence
Xiaomei Yao, Department of Oncology, McMaster University, 711 Concession Street, Hamilton, L8V 1C3, ON, Canada.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorIvan D. Florez
Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Department of Pediatrics, University of Antioquia, Colombia
Search for more papers by this authorPing Zhang
Editorial Office, Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorChongfan Zhang
Center for Clinical Practice Guideline Conduction and Evaluation, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorYi Zhang
Division of Thoracic Surgery, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorChunxue Wang
Division of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Neurology and Clinical Psychology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorXiaofang Liu
Division of Respirology, Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorXiuhong Nie
Division of Respirology, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorBing Wei
Division of Respirology, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorMichelle A. Ghert
Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Juravinski Cancer Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Xiaomei Yao
Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Center for Clinical Practice Guideline Conduction and Evaluation, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, P.R. China
Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Correspondence
Xiaomei Yao, Department of Oncology, McMaster University, 711 Concession Street, Hamilton, L8V 1C3, ON, Canada.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorIvan D. Florez
Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Department of Pediatrics, University of Antioquia, Colombia
Search for more papers by this authorPing Zhang
Editorial Office, Chinese Journal of Evidence-Based Pediatrics, Children's Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorChongfan Zhang
Center for Clinical Practice Guideline Conduction and Evaluation, Children’s Hospital of Fudan University, Shanghai, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorYi Zhang
Division of Thoracic Surgery, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorChunxue Wang
Division of Neuropsychiatry and Behavioral Neurology and Clinical Psychology, Beijing Tiantan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorXiaofang Liu
Division of Respirology, Tongren Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorXiuhong Nie
Division of Respirology, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorBing Wei
Division of Respirology, Xuanwu Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, P.R. China
Search for more papers by this authorMichelle A. Ghert
Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Juravinski Cancer Centre, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
This narrative review is an introduction for health professionals on how to conduct and report clinical research on six categories: treatment, diagnosis/differential diagnosis, prognosis, etiology, screening, and prevention. The importance of beginning with an appropriate clinical question and the exploration of how appropriate it is through a literature search are explained. There are three methodological directives that can assist clinicians in conducting their studies from a methodological perspective: (1) how to conduct an original study or a systematic review, (2) how to report an original study or a systematic review, and (3) how to assess the quality or risk of bias for a previous relevant original study or systematic review. This methodological overview article would provide readers with the key points and resources regarding how to perform high-quality research on the six main clinical categories.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.
REFERENCES
- 1 Clinical Research. National cancer Institute. Available at https://www.cancer.gov/publications/dictionaries/cancer-terms/def/clinical-research/. Accessed 23 November 2019.
- 2Graham R, Mancher M, Wolman DM, Greenfield S, Steinberg E. Clinical Practice Guidelines. We Can Trust. Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2011. Available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24983061/. Aaccessed 23 November 2019.
10.17226/13058 Google Scholar
- 3Werier J, Yao X, Caudrelier JM, et al. A systematic review of optimal treatment strategies for localized Ewing's sarcoma of bone after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Surg. Oncol. 2016; 25(1): 16–23.
- 4 US National Library of Medicine National Institutions of Health. PubMed database. Available at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/. Accessed 23 November 2019.
- 5 ACCESSSS Smart Search. Best evidence for health care. Available at https://www.accessss.org. Accessed August 1, 2019.
- 6 Health Institute Research Unit. Inclusion Criteria of eligible studies. Available at https://hiru.mcmaster.ca/hiru/InclusionCriteria.html. Accessed August 1, 2019.
- 7Doll R. Controlled trials: the 1948 watershed. BMJ. 1998; 317(7167): 1217–1220.
- 8 Glossary. ACP Journal Club. Available at http://acpjc.acponline.org/shared/glossary.html/. Accessed 23 November 2019.
- 9Bhide A, Shah PS, Acharya G. A simplified guide to randomized controlled trials. Acta Obstetricia et Gynecologica Scandinavica. 2018; 97(4): 380–387.
- 10Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Int Med. 2010; 152(11): 726–732.
- 11von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2008; 61(4): 344–349.
- 12 The Cochrane Library. What is a systematic review? Available at https://www.cochranelibrary.com/about/about-cochrane-reviews/. Accessed 23 November 2019.
- 13Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ. 2017; 358:j4008.
- 14 The Cochrane Training. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 6: Draft. Available at https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/. Accessed 23 November 2019.
- 15Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009; 62(10): 1006–1012.
- 16Sterne JAC, Savovic J, Page MJ, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2019; 366:l4898.
- 17Sterne JA, Hernan MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ. 2016; 355:i4919.
- 18Yao X, Vella E. How to conduct a high-quality original study on a diagnostic research topic. Surg. Oncol. 2017; 26(3): 305–309.
- 19Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. STARD 2015: an updated list of essential items for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies. Radiology. 2015; 277(3): 826–832.
- 20 Handbook for DTA Review, Cochrane methods screening and diagnostic tests. Available at https://methods.cochrane.org/sdt/handbook-dta-reviews. Accessed February 1, 2019.
- 21Yao X, Vella E, Brouwers M. How to conduct a high-quality systematic review on diagnostic research topics. Surg. Oncol. 2018; 27(1): 70–75.
- 22McInnes MDF, Moher D, Thombs BD, et al. Preferred reporting items for a systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic test accuracy studies: the PRISMA-DTA statement. JAMA. 2018; 319(4): 388–396.
- 23Whiting P, Savovic J, Higgins JP, et al. ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016; 69: 225–234.
- 24Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, et al. QUADAS-2: a revised tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. Ann Int Med. 2011; 155(8): 529–536.
- 25Hemingway H, Croft P, Perel P, et al. Prognosis research strategy (PROGRESS) 1: a framework for researching clinical outcomes. BMJ. 2013; 346:e5595.
- 26Yao X, Vella E, Brouwers M. How to conduct a high-quality original study on a prognostic research topic. Surg Oncol. 2018; 27(4): A9–A13.
- 27Collins GS, Reitsma JB, Altman DG, Moons KG. Transparent reporting of a multivariable prediction model for Individual Prognosis or Diagnosis (TRIPOD): the TRIPOD statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015; 68(2): 134–143.
- 28Debray TP, Damen JA, Snell KI, et al. A guide to systematic review and meta-analysis of prediction model performance. BMJ. 2017; 356:i6460.
- 29Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000; 283(15): 2008–2012. Apr 19.
- 30Hayden JA, van der Windt DA, Cartwright JL, Cote P, Bombardier C. Assessing bias in studies of prognostic factors. Ann Int Med. 2013; 158(4): 280–286.
- 31Wolff RF, Moons KGM, Riley RD, et al. PROBAST: a tool to assess the risk of bias and applicability of prediction model studies. Ann Int Med. 2019; 170(1): 51–58.
- 32O'Horo JC, Tande AJ. In older patients with UTIs, deferring or not prescribing antibiotics was linked to adverse outcomes. Ann Int Med. 2019; 170(12): JC70.
