RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Estimating and Testing an Index of Bias Attributable to Composite Outcomes in Comparative Studies
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.02.13.20020966
DO 10.1101/2020.02.13.20020966
A1 Fredi Alexander Diaz-Quijano
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/09/29/2020.02.13.20020966.abstract
AB Objective To develop an index to evaluate the bias attributable to composite outcomes (BACO) in comparative clinical studies.Study design and Setting I defined the BACO index as the ratio of the logarithm of the association measure (e.g., relative risk) of the composite outcome to that of its most relevant component endpoint (e.g., mortality). Methods to calculate the confidence intervals and test the null hypotheses (BACO index = 1) were described and applied in systematically selected clinical trials. Two other preselected trials were included as “positive controls” for being examples of primary composite outcomes disregarded due to inconsistency with the treatment effect on mortality.Results The BACO index values different from one were classified according to whether the use of composite outcomes overestimated (BACO index >1), underestimated (BACO index between zero and <1), or inverted (BACO index <0) the association between exposure and prognosis. In three of 23 systematically selected trials and the two positive controls, the BACO indices were significantly lower than one (p <0.005).Conclusion BACO index can warn that the composite outcome association is stronger, weaker, or even opposite than that of its most critical component.What is new?BACO index is the ratio of the logarithm of the association measure (e.g., RR) of the composite outcome to the logarithm of the association measure of the component endpoint that represents the study target (e.g., mortality).In comparative studies, the BACO index can be used to evaluate the correspondence between the effect on a composite outcome and that on its most critical component.This index could help to preset rules to make decisions for interpretation of clinical studies.A significant BACO should lead to the caution that the association of the composite is stronger (BACO index >1), weaker (BACO index between zero and <1), or even opposite (BACO index <0) than that of its most critical component.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis work had no specific funding. However, the author is beneficiary of a fellowship for research productivity from the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development - CNPq, process/contract identification: 312656/2019-0.Author DeclarationsAll relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.YesAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data necessary to verify the results were included in the manuscript or are available in the papers cited in the references.