Causal relationships between pain, medical treatments, and knee osteoarthritis: A graphical causal model to guide analyses.
Causal graphs
Causal inference
Knee osteoarthritis
Knee pain
Meniscal tear
Journal
Osteoarthritis and cartilage
ISSN: 1522-9653
Titre abrégé: Osteoarthritis Cartilage
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9305697
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
07 Nov 2023
07 Nov 2023
Historique:
received:
15
06
2023
revised:
15
09
2023
accepted:
24
10
2023
pubmed:
9
11
2023
medline:
9
11
2023
entrez:
8
11
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are a gold standard for estimating the benefits of clinical interventions, but their decision-making utility can be limited by relatively short follow-up time. Longer-term follow-up of RCT participants is essential to support treatment decisions. However, as time from randomization accrues, loss to follow-up and competing events can introduce biases and require covariate adjustment even for intention-to-treat effects. We describe a process for synthesizing expert knowledge and apply this to long-term follow-up of an RCT of treatments for meniscal tears in patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). We identified 2 post-randomization events likely to impact accurate assessment of pain outcomes beyond 5 years in trial participants: loss to follow-up and total knee replacement (TKR). We conducted literature searches for covariates related to pain and TKR in individuals with knee OA and combined these with expert input. We synthesized the evidence into graphical models. We identified 94 potential covariates potentially related to pain and/or TKR among individuals with knee OA. Of these, 46 were identified in the literature review and 48 by expert panelists. We determined that adjustment for 50 covariates may be required to estimate the long-term effects of knee OA treatments on pain. We present a process for combining literature reviews with expert input to synthesize existing knowledge and improve covariate selection. We apply this process to the long-term follow-up of a randomized trial and show that expert input provides additional information not obtainable from literature reviews alone.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37939895
pii: S1063-4584(23)00959-7
doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2023.10.007
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.