4.5 Review

Data Mining in Urology: Understanding Real-world Treatment Pathways for Lower Urinary Tract Systems via Exploration of Big Data

期刊

EUROPEAN UROLOGY FOCUS
卷 8, 期 2, 页码 391-393

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.euf.2022.03.019

关键词

Clinical routine data; Real-world evidence; Randomized controlled trials; Lower urinary tract symptoms; Small data; Heterogeneity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

With the increasing number of treatment options, different combinations of treatment decisions lead to diverse treatment pathways. Lack of randomized controlled trial evidence necessitates the integration of evidence from routine clinical data. Statistical multi-state models offer a powerful framework for analyzing heterogeneous pathways.
With an increasing number of novel therapeutic options for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS), the spectrum of potential treatment pathways resulting from different combinations of treatment decisions is expanding and evolving. Treatment decisions are frequently made with little or no evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and thus require evidence from other data sources. Clinical routine data reflect real-world treatment pathways. However, evidence for LUTS from routine data means that heterogeneous pathways need to be simultaneously analyzed for compiling evidence in the absence of RCTs. Statistical multi-state model approaches can provide a powerful framework for achieving this goal. More extensive statistical and methodological efforts in the area of similarity of small data are needed to enable the valid pooling of pathways towards joining evidence. Patient summary: Treatment decisions should rely primarily on evidence from clinical trials. When treatment for which there is limited trial evidence needs to be provided, analysis of results from routine clinical practice can represent valuable complementary evidence, but this requires integration of data from heterogeneous treatment pathways. (C) 2022 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据