You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Reporting of heterogeneity of treatment effect in cohort studies: a review of the literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12874-017-0466-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Meryl Dahan, Caroline Scemama, Raphael Porcher, David J. Biau |
| Abstract |
This article corresponds to a literature review and analyze how heterogeneity of treatment (HTE) is reported and addressed in cohort studies and to evaluate the use of the different measures to HTE analysis. prospective cohort studies, in English language, measuring the effect of a treatment (pharmacological, interventional, or other) published among 119 core clinical journals (defined by the National Library of Medicine) in the last 16 years were selected in the following data source: Medline. One reviewer randomly sampled journal articles with 1: 1 stratification by journal type: high impact journals (the New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, LANCET, Annals of Internal Medicine, BMJ and Plos Medicine) and low impact journal (the remaining journals) to identify 150 eligible studies. Two reviewers independently and in duplicate used standardized piloted forms to screen study reports for eligibility and to extract data. They also used explicit criteria to determine whether a cohort study reported HTE analysis. Logistic regression was used to examine the association of prespecified study characteristics with reporting versus not reporting of heterogeneity of treatment effect. One hundred fifty cohort studies were included of which 88 (58%) reported HTE analysis. High impact journals (Odds Ratio: 3.5, 95% CI: 1.78-7.5; P < 0.001), pharmacological studies (Odds Ratio: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.13-0.51; P < 0.001) and studies published after 2014 (Odds Ratio: 0.5, 95% CI: 0.25-0.97; P = 0.004) were associated with more frequent reporting of HTE. 27 (31%) studies which reported HTE used an interaction test. More than half cohort studies report some measure of heterogeneity of treatment effect. Prospective cohort studies published in high impact journals, with large sample size, or studying a pharmacological treatment are associated with more frequent HTE reporting. The source of funding was not associated with HTE reporting. There is a need for guidelines on how to perform HTE analyses in cohort studies. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 19 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 32% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 11% |
| Librarian | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 16% |
| Unknown | 3 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 26% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 5% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 16% |
| Unknown | 4 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 February 2018.
All research outputs
#17,926,658
of 23,016,919 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#1,693
of 2,030 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#311,327
of 443,072 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Research Methodology
#43
of 52 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,016,919 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,030 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.2. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 443,072 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 52 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.