Analysis of combined data from heterogeneous study designs: An applied example from the patient navigation research program

Richard G. Roetzheim, Karen M. Freund, Don K. Corle, David M. Murray, Frederick R. Snyder, Andrea C. Kronman, Pascal Jean-Pierre, Peter C. Raich, Alan E C Holden, Julie S. Darnell, Victoria Warren-Mears, Steven Patierno

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background The Patient Navigation Research Program (PNRP) is a cooperative effort of nine research projects, with similar clinical criteria but with different study designs. To evaluate projects such as PNRP, it is desirable to perform a pooled analysis to increase power relative to the individual projects. There is no agreed-upon prospective methodology, however, for analyzing combined data arising from different study designs. Expert opinions were thus solicited from the members of the PNRP Design and Analysis Committee.Purpose To review possible methodologies for analyzing combined data arising from heterogeneous study designs.Methods The Design and Analysis Committee critically reviewed the pros and cons of five potential methods for analyzing combined PNRP project data. The conclusions were based on simple consensus. The five approaches reviewed included the following: (1) analyzing and reporting each project separately, (2) combining data from all projects and performing an individual-level analysis, (3) pooling data from projects having similar study designs, (4) analyzing pooled data using a prospective meta-analytic technique, and (5) analyzing pooled data utilizing a novel simulated group-randomized design.Results Methodologies varied in their ability to incorporate data from all PNRP projects, to appropriately account for differing study designs, and to accommodate differing project sample sizes.Limitations The conclusions reached were based on expert opinion and not derived from actual analyses performed.Conclusions The ability to analyze pooled data arising from differing study designs may provide pertinent information to inform programmatic, budgetary, and policy perspectives. Multisite community-based research may not lend itself well to the more stringent explanatory and pragmatic standards of a randomized controlled trial design. Given our growing interest in community-based population research, the challenges inherent in the analysis of heterogeneous study design are likely to become more salient. Discussion of the analytic issues faced by the PNRP and the methodological approaches we considered may be of value to other prospective community-based research programs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)176-187
Number of pages12
JournalClinical Trials
Volume9
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2012

Fingerprint

Patient Navigation
Research
Expert Testimony
Sample Size
Meta-Analysis
Research Design
Randomized Controlled Trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • Pharmacology

Cite this

Roetzheim, R. G., Freund, K. M., Corle, D. K., Murray, D. M., Snyder, F. R., Kronman, A. C., ... Patierno, S. (2012). Analysis of combined data from heterogeneous study designs: An applied example from the patient navigation research program. Clinical Trials, 9(2), 176-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774511433284

Analysis of combined data from heterogeneous study designs : An applied example from the patient navigation research program. / Roetzheim, Richard G.; Freund, Karen M.; Corle, Don K.; Murray, David M.; Snyder, Frederick R.; Kronman, Andrea C.; Jean-Pierre, Pascal; Raich, Peter C.; Holden, Alan E C; Darnell, Julie S.; Warren-Mears, Victoria; Patierno, Steven.

In: Clinical Trials, Vol. 9, No. 2, 04.2012, p. 176-187.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Roetzheim, RG, Freund, KM, Corle, DK, Murray, DM, Snyder, FR, Kronman, AC, Jean-Pierre, P, Raich, PC, Holden, AEC, Darnell, JS, Warren-Mears, V & Patierno, S 2012, 'Analysis of combined data from heterogeneous study designs: An applied example from the patient navigation research program', Clinical Trials, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 176-187. https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774511433284
Roetzheim, Richard G. ; Freund, Karen M. ; Corle, Don K. ; Murray, David M. ; Snyder, Frederick R. ; Kronman, Andrea C. ; Jean-Pierre, Pascal ; Raich, Peter C. ; Holden, Alan E C ; Darnell, Julie S. ; Warren-Mears, Victoria ; Patierno, Steven. / Analysis of combined data from heterogeneous study designs : An applied example from the patient navigation research program. In: Clinical Trials. 2012 ; Vol. 9, No. 2. pp. 176-187.
@article{f533e7c276c1458ab10328531c10c8dd,
title = "Analysis of combined data from heterogeneous study designs: An applied example from the patient navigation research program",
abstract = "Background The Patient Navigation Research Program (PNRP) is a cooperative effort of nine research projects, with similar clinical criteria but with different study designs. To evaluate projects such as PNRP, it is desirable to perform a pooled analysis to increase power relative to the individual projects. There is no agreed-upon prospective methodology, however, for analyzing combined data arising from different study designs. Expert opinions were thus solicited from the members of the PNRP Design and Analysis Committee.Purpose To review possible methodologies for analyzing combined data arising from heterogeneous study designs.Methods The Design and Analysis Committee critically reviewed the pros and cons of five potential methods for analyzing combined PNRP project data. The conclusions were based on simple consensus. The five approaches reviewed included the following: (1) analyzing and reporting each project separately, (2) combining data from all projects and performing an individual-level analysis, (3) pooling data from projects having similar study designs, (4) analyzing pooled data using a prospective meta-analytic technique, and (5) analyzing pooled data utilizing a novel simulated group-randomized design.Results Methodologies varied in their ability to incorporate data from all PNRP projects, to appropriately account for differing study designs, and to accommodate differing project sample sizes.Limitations The conclusions reached were based on expert opinion and not derived from actual analyses performed.Conclusions The ability to analyze pooled data arising from differing study designs may provide pertinent information to inform programmatic, budgetary, and policy perspectives. Multisite community-based research may not lend itself well to the more stringent explanatory and pragmatic standards of a randomized controlled trial design. Given our growing interest in community-based population research, the challenges inherent in the analysis of heterogeneous study design are likely to become more salient. Discussion of the analytic issues faced by the PNRP and the methodological approaches we considered may be of value to other prospective community-based research programs.",
author = "Roetzheim, {Richard G.} and Freund, {Karen M.} and Corle, {Don K.} and Murray, {David M.} and Snyder, {Frederick R.} and Kronman, {Andrea C.} and Pascal Jean-Pierre and Raich, {Peter C.} and Holden, {Alan E C} and Darnell, {Julie S.} and Victoria Warren-Mears and Steven Patierno",
year = "2012",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1177/1740774511433284",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "9",
pages = "176--187",
journal = "Clinical Trials",
issn = "1740-7745",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Analysis of combined data from heterogeneous study designs

T2 - An applied example from the patient navigation research program

AU - Roetzheim, Richard G.

AU - Freund, Karen M.

AU - Corle, Don K.

AU - Murray, David M.

AU - Snyder, Frederick R.

AU - Kronman, Andrea C.

AU - Jean-Pierre, Pascal

AU - Raich, Peter C.

AU - Holden, Alan E C

AU - Darnell, Julie S.

AU - Warren-Mears, Victoria

AU - Patierno, Steven

PY - 2012/4

Y1 - 2012/4

N2 - Background The Patient Navigation Research Program (PNRP) is a cooperative effort of nine research projects, with similar clinical criteria but with different study designs. To evaluate projects such as PNRP, it is desirable to perform a pooled analysis to increase power relative to the individual projects. There is no agreed-upon prospective methodology, however, for analyzing combined data arising from different study designs. Expert opinions were thus solicited from the members of the PNRP Design and Analysis Committee.Purpose To review possible methodologies for analyzing combined data arising from heterogeneous study designs.Methods The Design and Analysis Committee critically reviewed the pros and cons of five potential methods for analyzing combined PNRP project data. The conclusions were based on simple consensus. The five approaches reviewed included the following: (1) analyzing and reporting each project separately, (2) combining data from all projects and performing an individual-level analysis, (3) pooling data from projects having similar study designs, (4) analyzing pooled data using a prospective meta-analytic technique, and (5) analyzing pooled data utilizing a novel simulated group-randomized design.Results Methodologies varied in their ability to incorporate data from all PNRP projects, to appropriately account for differing study designs, and to accommodate differing project sample sizes.Limitations The conclusions reached were based on expert opinion and not derived from actual analyses performed.Conclusions The ability to analyze pooled data arising from differing study designs may provide pertinent information to inform programmatic, budgetary, and policy perspectives. Multisite community-based research may not lend itself well to the more stringent explanatory and pragmatic standards of a randomized controlled trial design. Given our growing interest in community-based population research, the challenges inherent in the analysis of heterogeneous study design are likely to become more salient. Discussion of the analytic issues faced by the PNRP and the methodological approaches we considered may be of value to other prospective community-based research programs.

AB - Background The Patient Navigation Research Program (PNRP) is a cooperative effort of nine research projects, with similar clinical criteria but with different study designs. To evaluate projects such as PNRP, it is desirable to perform a pooled analysis to increase power relative to the individual projects. There is no agreed-upon prospective methodology, however, for analyzing combined data arising from different study designs. Expert opinions were thus solicited from the members of the PNRP Design and Analysis Committee.Purpose To review possible methodologies for analyzing combined data arising from heterogeneous study designs.Methods The Design and Analysis Committee critically reviewed the pros and cons of five potential methods for analyzing combined PNRP project data. The conclusions were based on simple consensus. The five approaches reviewed included the following: (1) analyzing and reporting each project separately, (2) combining data from all projects and performing an individual-level analysis, (3) pooling data from projects having similar study designs, (4) analyzing pooled data using a prospective meta-analytic technique, and (5) analyzing pooled data utilizing a novel simulated group-randomized design.Results Methodologies varied in their ability to incorporate data from all PNRP projects, to appropriately account for differing study designs, and to accommodate differing project sample sizes.Limitations The conclusions reached were based on expert opinion and not derived from actual analyses performed.Conclusions The ability to analyze pooled data arising from differing study designs may provide pertinent information to inform programmatic, budgetary, and policy perspectives. Multisite community-based research may not lend itself well to the more stringent explanatory and pragmatic standards of a randomized controlled trial design. Given our growing interest in community-based population research, the challenges inherent in the analysis of heterogeneous study design are likely to become more salient. Discussion of the analytic issues faced by the PNRP and the methodological approaches we considered may be of value to other prospective community-based research programs.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84861811082&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84861811082&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1740774511433284

DO - 10.1177/1740774511433284

M3 - Article

C2 - 22273587

AN - SCOPUS:84861811082

VL - 9

SP - 176

EP - 187

JO - Clinical Trials

JF - Clinical Trials

SN - 1740-7745

IS - 2

ER -