Stephanie Polus1, Dawid Pieper2, Jacob Burns3, Atle Fretheim4, Craig Ramsay5, Julian P T Higgins6, Tim Mathes2, Lisa M Pfadenhauer3, Eva A Rehfuess3. 1. Institute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, Pettenkofer School of Public Health, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany. Electronic address: polus@ibe.med.uni-muenchen.de. 2. Institute for Research in Operative Medicine, University Witten/Herdecke, Ostmerheimer Str. 200, 51109 Cologne, Germany. 3. Institute for Medical Information Processing, Biometry and Epidemiology, Pettenkofer School of Public Health, LMU Munich, Marchioninistr. 15, 81377, Munich, Germany. 4. Norwegian Institute of Public Health, P.O. Box 4404 Nydalen, 0403 Oslo, Norway. 5. Health Services Research Unit, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen AB25 2ZD, UK. 6. School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PS, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to examine the application, design, and analysis characteristics of controlled before-after (CBA) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies and their use in Cochrane reviews. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched the Cochrane library for reviews including these study designs from May 2012 to March 2015 and purposively selected, where available, two reviews each across 10 prespecified intervention types. We randomly selected two CBA and two ITS studies from each review. Two researchers independently extracted information from the studies and the respective reviews. RESULTS: Sixty-nine reviews considered CBA and ITS studies for inclusion. We analyzed 21 CBA and 16 ITS studies from 11 to 8 reviews, respectively. Cochrane reviews inconsistently defined and labeled CBA and ITS studies. Many studies did not meet the Cochrane definition or the minimum criteria provided by Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care. The studies present a heterogeneous set of study features and applied a large variety of analyses. CONCLUSION: While CBA and ITS studies represent important study designs to evaluate the effects of interventions, especially on a population or organizational level, unclear study design features challenge unequivocal classification and appropriate use. We discuss options for more specific definitions and explicit criteria for CBA and ITS studies.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to examine the application, design, and analysis characteristics of controlled before-after (CBA) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies and their use in Cochrane reviews. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We searched the Cochrane library for reviews including these study designs from May 2012 to March 2015 and purposively selected, where available, two reviews each across 10 prespecified intervention types. We randomly selected two CBA and two ITS studies from each review. Two researchers independently extracted information from the studies and the respective reviews. RESULTS: Sixty-nine reviews considered CBA and ITS studies for inclusion. We analyzed 21 CBA and 16 ITS studies from 11 to 8 reviews, respectively. Cochrane reviews inconsistently defined and labeled CBA and ITS studies. Many studies did not meet the Cochrane definition or the minimum criteria provided by Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care. The studies present a heterogeneous set of study features and applied a large variety of analyses. CONCLUSION: While CBA and ITS studies represent important study designs to evaluate the effects of interventions, especially on a population or organizational level, unclear study design features challenge unequivocal classification and appropriate use. We discuss options for more specific definitions and explicit criteria for CBA and ITS studies.
Authors: Ana Clavería; María Victoria Delgado-Martín; Ana Goicoechea-Castaño; José Manuel Iglesias-Moreno; Clara García-Cendón; María Victoria Martín-Miguel; Rita Villarino-Moure; Carolina Barreiro-Arceiz; Isabel Rey-Gómez-Serranillos; Javier Roca Journal: Antibiotics (Basel) Date: 2022-02-18
Authors: Elizabeth Korevaar; Amalia Karahalios; Andrew B Forbes; Simon L Turner; Steve McDonald; Monica Taljaard; Jeremy M Grimshaw; Allen C Cheng; Lisa Bero; Joanne E McKenzie Journal: F1000Res Date: 2020-02-12