Guidelines for reporting methodological challenges and evaluating potential bias in dementia research.
Guidelines for reporting methodological challenges and evaluating potential bias in dementia research.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jalz.2015.06.1885
复制
发表时间：
2015-09
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
MELODEM Initiative
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Weuve J;Proust-Lima C;Power MC;Gross AL;Hofer SM;Thiébaut R;Chêne G;Glymour MM;Dufouil C;MELODEM Initiative
痴呆症和相关神经系统疾病（包括阿尔茨海默病）的临床和人口研究面临着几种独特的方法挑战。确定预防和治疗策略的进展取决于有效和严格的分析方法，但研究文献很少反映出对“最佳实践”的共识。我们介绍了一个大型科学工作组关于痴呆症临床和人群研究方法的研究结果，该工作组确定了以下五类方法挑战：(1)损耗/样本选择，包括选择性生存；(2)测量，包括诊断标准的不确定性、神经心理学评估的测量误差以及实践或重测的影响；(3)当参与者被跟踪数月、数年甚至数十年时，纵向模型的规范；(4)时变测量；(5)高维数据。我们解释了为什么每个挑战在痴呆症研究中都很重要，以及它如何影响研究结果转化为有效的预防或护理策略。我们提出了一份潜在偏倚来源的清单，在报道痴呆研究时应该常规处理。
Clinical and population research on dementia and related neurologic conditions, including Alzheimer’s disease, faces several unique methodological challenges. Progress to identify preventive and therapeutic strategies rests on valid and rigorous analytic approaches, but the research literature reflects little consensus on “best practices.” We present findings from a large scientific working group on research methods for clinical and population studies of dementia, which identified five categories of methodological challenges as follows: (1) attrition/sample selection, including selective survival; (2) measurement, including uncertainty in diagnostic criteria, measurement error in neuropsychological assessments, and practice or retest effects; (3) specification of longitudinal models when participants are followed for months, years, or even decades; (4) time-varying measurements; and (5) high-dimensional data. We explain why each challenge is important in dementia research and how it could compromise the translation of research findings into effective prevention or care strategies. We advance a checklist of potential sources of bias that should be routinely addressed when reporting dementia research.