Evaluating Community-Based Translational Interventions Using Historical Controls: Propensity Score vs. Disease Risk Score Approach.
Comparative effectiveness evaluation
Disease risk score
Historical controls
Prognostic score
Propensity score
Single-arm intervention
Journal
Prevention science : the official journal of the Society for Prevention Research
ISSN: 1573-6695
Titre abrégé: Prev Sci
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100894724
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
05 2019
05 2019
Historique:
pubmed:
13
2
2019
medline:
25
4
2020
entrez:
13
2
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Many community-based translations of evidence-based interventions are designed as one-arm studies due to ethical and other considerations. Evaluating the impacts of such programs is challenging. Here, we examine the effectiveness of the lifestyle intervention implemented by the Special Diabetes Program for Indians Diabetes Prevention (SDPI-DP) demonstration project, a translational lifestyle intervention among American Indian and Alaska Native communities. Data from the landmark Diabetes Prevention Program placebo group was used as a historical control. We compared the use of propensity score (PS) and disease risk score (DRS) matching to adjust for potential confounder imbalance between groups. The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for diabetes risk was 0.35 for SDPI-DP lifestyle intervention vs. control. However, when relevant diabetes risk factors were considered, the adjusted HR estimates were attenuated toward 1, ranging from 0.56 (95% CI 0.44-0.71) to 0.69 (95% CI 0.56-0.96). The differences in estimated HRs using the PS and DRS approaches were relatively small but DRS matching resulted in more participants being matched and smaller standard errors of effect estimates. Carefully employed, publicly available randomized clinical trial data can be used as a historical control to evaluate the intervention effectiveness of one-arm community translational initiatives. It is critical to use a proper statistical method to balance the distributions of potential confounders between comparison groups in this kind of evaluations.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30747394
doi: 10.1007/s11121-019-0980-3
pii: 10.1007/s11121-019-0980-3
pmc: PMC6520136
mid: NIHMS1521466
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
598-608Subventions
Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : R21DK108187
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : P30 DK092923
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : R21 DK108187
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIDDK NIH HHS
ID : 1P30DK092923
Pays : United States
Références
Am J Epidemiol. 2010 May 1;171(9):980-8
pubmed: 20375194
Am J Epidemiol. 1976 Dec;104(6):609-20
pubmed: 998608
N Engl J Med. 2003 Aug 7;349(6):523-34
pubmed: 12904517
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2015 Mar;3(3):160-1
pubmed: 25652128
Biostatistics. 2001 Dec;2(4):383-96
pubmed: 12933631
N Engl J Med. 1996 Aug 15;335(7):453-61
pubmed: 8672166
Diabetes Care. 2003 Mar;26(3):725-31
pubmed: 12610029
Am J Epidemiol. 2011 Sep 1;174(5):613-20
pubmed: 21749976
Circulation. 2000 Jun 6;101(22):2572-8
pubmed: 10840007
Arch Intern Med. 2007 May 28;167(10):1068-74
pubmed: 17533210
Circulation. 1998 May 12;97(18):1837-47
pubmed: 9603539
Ann Intern Med. 2002 Apr 16;136(8):575-81
pubmed: 11955025
Circulation. 2008 Feb 12;117(6):743-53
pubmed: 18212285
BMJ. 2011 Nov 28;343:d7163
pubmed: 22123912
Diabetes Care. 2005 Aug;28(8):2013-8
pubmed: 16043747
Stat Methods Med Res. 2009 Feb;18(1):67-80
pubmed: 18562398
Stat Med. 1998 Oct 15;17(19):2265-81
pubmed: 9802183
Am J Prev Med. 2005 Jan;28(1):126-39
pubmed: 15626569
Am J Epidemiol. 2005 May 1;161(9):891-8
pubmed: 15840622
Prev Sci. 2017 Aug;18(6):671-680
pubmed: 27600286
Diabetes Care. 2013 Jul;36(7):2027-34
pubmed: 23275375
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2015 Sep;24(9):951-61
pubmed: 26112690
Epidemiology. 2008 Jan;19(1):30-7
pubmed: 18091000
Eur J Public Health. 2012 Oct;22(5):625-9
pubmed: 21990343
Am J Epidemiol. 2017 May 1;185(9):842-852
pubmed: 28338910
Ann Intern Med. 2009 Jun 2;150(11):741-51
pubmed: 19487709
Diabetes Care. 2007 Jun;30(6):1647-52
pubmed: 17360974
N Engl J Med. 2001 May 3;344(18):1343-50
pubmed: 11333990
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2006 Apr 04;6:19
pubmed: 16595012
Diabetes Care. 2016 Jul;39(7):1186-201
pubmed: 27631469
Diabetes Care. 1997 Apr;20(4):537-44
pubmed: 9096977
Cancer Treat Rep. 1985 Oct;69(10):1071-77
pubmed: 4042087
Diabetes Care. 2014 Apr;37(4):922-33
pubmed: 24652723
Diabetes Care. 2014 Jul;37(7):1892-9
pubmed: 24784830
N Engl J Med. 2002 Feb 7;346(6):393-403
pubmed: 11832527
Int J Obes (Lond). 2017 Nov;41(11):1615-1620
pubmed: 28720876
Am J Epidemiol. 2003 Aug 1;158(3):280-7
pubmed: 12882951
Diabetes Care. 1999 Apr;22(4):623-34
pubmed: 10189543
Biometrics. 2005 Dec;61(4):899-911; discussion 911-41
pubmed: 16401257
BMJ. 2015 Feb 19;350:h454
pubmed: 25697494
Circulation. 2006 Jun 27;113(25):2897-905
pubmed: 16769914
J Gen Intern Med. 2009 May;24(5):649-55
pubmed: 19308336
J Clin Epidemiol. 1996 Dec;49(12):1373-9
pubmed: 8970487
Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2015 Aug;3(8):624-37
pubmed: 26109024