Subgroup Analysis of Trials Is Rarely Easy (SATIRE): a study protocol for a systematic review to characterize the analysis, reporting, and claim of subgroup effects in randomized trials

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Subgroup analyses in randomized trials examine whether effects of interventions differ between subgroups of study populations according to characteristics of patients or interventions. However, findings from subgroup analyses may be misleading, potentially resulting in suboptimal clinical and health decision making. Few studies have investigated the reporting and conduct of subgroup analyses and a number of important questions remain unanswered. The objectives of this study are: 1) to describe the reporting of subgroup analyses and claims of subgroup effects in randomized controlled trials, 2) to assess study characteristics associated with reporting of subgroup analyses and with claims of subgroup effects, and 3) to examine the analysis, and interpretation of subgroup effects for each study's primary outcome.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We will conduct a systematic review of 464 randomized controlled human trials published in 2007 in the 118 Core Clinical Journals defined by the National Library of Medicine. We will randomly select journal articles, stratified in a 1:1 ratio by higher impact versus lower impact journals. According to 2007 ISI total citations, we consider the <it>New England Journal of Medicine, JAMA, Lancet, Annals of Internal Medicine</it>, and <it>BMJ </it>as higher impact journals. Teams of two reviewers will independently screen full texts of reports for eligibility, and abstract data, using standardized, pilot-tested extraction forms. We will conduct univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses to examine the association of pre-specified study characteristics with reporting of subgroup analyses and with claims of subgroup effects for the primary and any other outcomes.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>A clear understanding of subgroup analyses, as currently conducted and reported in published randomized controlled trials, will reveal both strengths and weaknesses of this practice. Our findings will contribute to a set of recommendations to optimize the conduct and reporting of subgroup analyses, and claim and interpretation of subgroup effects in randomized trials.</p

The asthma epidemic and our artificial habitats

BACKGROUND: The recent increase in childhood asthma has been a puzzling one. Recent views focus on the role of infection in the education of the immune system of young children. However, this so called hygiene hypothesis fails to answer some important questions about the current trends in asthma or to account for environmental influences that bear little relation to infection. DISCUSSION: The multi-factorial nature of asthma, reflecting the different ways we tend to interact with our environment, mandates that we look at the asthma epidemic from a broader perspective. Seemingly modern affluent lifestyles are placing us increasingly in static, artificial, microenvironments very different from the conditions prevailed for most part of our evolution and shaped our organisms. Changes that occurred during the second half of the 20th century in industrialized nations with the spread of central heating/conditioning, building insulation, hygiene, TV/PC/games, manufactured food, indoor entertainment, cars, medical care, and sedentary lifestyles all seem to be depriving our children from the essential inputs needed to develop normal airway function (resistance). Asthma according to this view is a manifestation of our respiratory maladaptation to modern lifestyles, or in other words to our increasingly artificial habitats. The basis of the artificial habitat notion may lie in reduced exposure of innate immunity to a variety of environmental stimuli, infectious and non-infectious, leading to reduced formulation of regulatory cells/cytokines as well as inscribed regulatory pathways. This could contribute to a faulty checking mechanism of non-functional Th2 (and likely Th1) responses, resulting in asthma and other immuno-dysregulation disorders. SUMMARY: In this piece I discuss the artificial habitat concept, its correspondence with epidemiological data of asthma and allergy, and provide possible immunological underpinning for it from an evolutionary perspective of health and disease