Informing Healthcare Decisions with Observational Research Assessing Causal Effect. An Official American Thoracic Society Research Statement.
expert_opinion · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 33385220.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1164/rccm.202010-3943ST and PMC identifier 7781125.
- Licence recorded as CC BY-NC.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
<b>Rationale:</b> Decisions in medicine are made on the basis of knowledge and reasoning, often in shared conversations with patients and families in consideration of clinical practice guideline recommendations, individual preferences, and individual goals. Observational studies can provide valuable knowledge to inform guidelines, decisions, and policy.<b>Objectives:</b> The American Thoracic Society (ATS) created a multidisciplinary <i>ad hoc</i> committee to develop a research statement to clarify the role of observational studies-alongside randomized controlled trials (RCTs)-in informing clinical decisions in pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine.<b>Methods:</b> The committee examined the strengths of observational studies assessing causal effects, how they complement RCTs, factors that impact observational study quality, perceptions of observational research, and, finally, the practicalities of incorporating observational research into ATS clinical practice guidelines.<b>Measurements and Main Results:</b> There are strengths and weakness of observational studies as well as RCTs. Observational studies can provide evidence in representative and diverse patient populations. Quality observational studies should be sought in the development of ATS clinical practice guidelines, and medical decision-making in general, when <i>1</i>) no RCTs are identified or RCTs are appraised as being of low- or very low-quality (<b>replacement</b>); <i>2</i>) RCTs are of moderate quality because of indirectness, imprecision, or inconsistency, and observational studies mitigate the reason that RCT evidence was downgraded (<b>complementary</b>); or <i>3</i>) RCTs do not provide evidence for outcomes that a guideline committee considers essential for decision-making (e.g., rare or long-term outcomes; "<b>sequential"</b>).<b>Conclusions:</b> Observational studies should be considered in developing clinical practice guidelines and in making clinical decisions.
Medical subject headings
- Biomedical Research
- Biomedical Research/standards
- Clinical Decision-Making
- Critical Care
- Critical Care/standards
- Delivery of Health Care
- Delivery of Health Care/standards
- Evidence-Based Medicine
- Evidence-Based Medicine/standards
- Humans
- Observational Studies as Topic
- Observational Studies as Topic/standards
- Practice Guidelines as Topic
- Societies, Medical
- Thoracic Diseases
- Thoracic Diseases/therapy
- United States