P value and Bayesian analysis in randomized-controlled trials in child health research published over 10 years, 2007 to 2017: a methodological review protocol.
Analysis
Bayesian
Child health
Frequentist
Pvalue
Randomized-controlled trials
Journal
Systematic reviews
ISSN: 2046-4053
Titre abrégé: Syst Rev
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101580575
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 03 2021
10 03 2021
Historique:
received:
18
09
2020
accepted:
26
02
2021
entrez:
11
3
2021
pubmed:
12
3
2021
medline:
25
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There is an unresolved debate about the reliability of the interpretation of P value. Some investigators have suggested that an alternative Bayesian method is preferred in conducting health research. As randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) are important in generating research evidence, we decided to investigate the extent, if any, the inferential statistical framework in published RCTs in child health research have changed over 10 years. We aim to examine the change in P value and Bayesian analysis in RCTs in child health research papers published from 2007 to 2017. We will search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley) to identify relevant citations. We will leverage a pre-existing sample of child health RCTs published in 2007 (n=300) used in our previous study of reporting quality of pediatric RCTs. Using the same strategy and study selection methods, we will identify a comparable random sample of child health RCTs published in 2017 (n=300). Eligible studies will include RCTs in health research among individuals aged 21 years and below. One reviewer will select studies for inclusion and extract the data and another reviewer will verify these. Disagreements will be resolved by a discussion between reviewers or by involving another reviewer. We will perform a descriptive analysis of 2007 and 2017 samples and analyze the results using both the frequentist and Bayesian methods. We will present specific characteristics of the clinical trials from 2007 and 2017 in tabular and graphical forms. We will report the difference in the proportion of P value and Bayesian analysis between 2007 and 2017 to assess the 10-year change. Clustering around P values of significance, if observed, will be reported. This review will present the difference in the proportion of trials that reported on P value and Bayesian analysis between 2007 and 2017 to assess the 10-year change. The implications for future clinical research will be discussed and this research work will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. This review has the potential to help inform the need for a change in the methodological approach from the null hypothesis significance test to Bayesian methods. Open Science Framework https://osf.io/aj2df.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
There is an unresolved debate about the reliability of the interpretation of P value. Some investigators have suggested that an alternative Bayesian method is preferred in conducting health research. As randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) are important in generating research evidence, we decided to investigate the extent, if any, the inferential statistical framework in published RCTs in child health research have changed over 10 years. We aim to examine the change in P value and Bayesian analysis in RCTs in child health research papers published from 2007 to 2017.
METHODS
We will search the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley) to identify relevant citations. We will leverage a pre-existing sample of child health RCTs published in 2007 (n=300) used in our previous study of reporting quality of pediatric RCTs. Using the same strategy and study selection methods, we will identify a comparable random sample of child health RCTs published in 2017 (n=300). Eligible studies will include RCTs in health research among individuals aged 21 years and below. One reviewer will select studies for inclusion and extract the data and another reviewer will verify these. Disagreements will be resolved by a discussion between reviewers or by involving another reviewer. We will perform a descriptive analysis of 2007 and 2017 samples and analyze the results using both the frequentist and Bayesian methods. We will present specific characteristics of the clinical trials from 2007 and 2017 in tabular and graphical forms. We will report the difference in the proportion of P value and Bayesian analysis between 2007 and 2017 to assess the 10-year change. Clustering around P values of significance, if observed, will be reported.
DISCUSSION
This review will present the difference in the proportion of trials that reported on P value and Bayesian analysis between 2007 and 2017 to assess the 10-year change. The implications for future clinical research will be discussed and this research work will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. This review has the potential to help inform the need for a change in the methodological approach from the null hypothesis significance test to Bayesian methods.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
Open Science Framework https://osf.io/aj2df.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33691775
doi: 10.1186/s13643-021-01622-8
pii: 10.1186/s13643-021-01622-8
pmc: PMC7948362
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
71Références
Semin Hematol. 2008 Jul;45(3):135-40
pubmed: 18582619
Ann Intern Med. 1999 Jun 15;130(12):1005-13
pubmed: 10383350
Perspect Psychol Sci. 2011 May;6(3):291-8
pubmed: 26168519
J Pediatr. 2018 Feb;193:237-244.e37
pubmed: 29169611
Pediatrics. 2017 Sep;140(3):
pubmed: 28827380
Epidemiology. 2013 Jan;24(1):69-72
pubmed: 23232612
Ann Intern Med. 1999 Jun 15;130(12):995-1004
pubmed: 10383371
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 01;4:1
pubmed: 25554246
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017 Dec;157(6):915-918
pubmed: 29192853
Stat Med. 2012 Nov 10;31(25):2955-72
pubmed: 22711340
Front Psychol. 2010 Jul 02;1:26
pubmed: 21607077
JAMA. 2016 Mar 15;315(11):1141-8
pubmed: 26978209
BMC Pediatr. 2010 Dec 22;10:96
pubmed: 21176224