Name
Title | ||
|---|---|---|
Comparing and Contrasting A Priori and A Posteriori Generalizability Assessment of Clinical Trials on Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. |
Abstract | ||
|---|---|---|
Clinical trials are indispensable tools for evidence-based medicine. However, they are often criticized for poor generalizability. Traditional trial generalizability assessment can only be done after the trial results are published, which compares the enrolled patients with a convenience sample of real-world patients. However, the proliferation of electronic data in clinical trial registries and clinical data warehouses offer a great opportunity to assess the generalizability during the design phase of a new trial. In this work, we compared and contrasted a priori (based on eligibility criteria) and a posteriori (based on enrolled patients) generalizability of Type 2 diabetes clinical trials. Further, we showed that comparing the study population selected by the clinical trial eligibility criteria to the real-world patient population is a good indicator of the generalizability of trials. Our findings demonstrate that the a priori generalizability of a trial is comparable to its a posteriori generalizability in identifying restrictive quantitative eligibility criteria. |
Year | Venue | Field |
|---|---|---|
2017 | AMIA | Generalizability theory,Population,Electronic data,Type 2 diabetes,A priori and a posteriori,Clinical trial,Intensive care medicine,Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus,Medicine,Population study |
DocType | Volume | Citations |
Conference | 2017 | 0 |
PageRank | References | Authors |
0.34 | 0 | 8 |
Name | Order | Citations | PageRank |
|---|---|---|---|
| Zhe He | 1 | 27 | 6.25 |
| Arturo Gonzalez-Izquierdo | 2 | 1 | 2.32 |
| Spiros Denaxas | 3 | 1 | 2.65 |
| Andrei Sura | 4 | 0 | 1.01 |
| Yi Guo | 5 | 5 | 8.47 |
| William R. Hogan | 6 | 294 | 53.52 |
| Elizabeth Shenkman | 7 | 4 | 3.87 |
| Jiang Bian | 8 | 150 | 43.09 |