Das Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE-) Statement: Leitlinien für das Berichten von Beobachtungsstudien

Zusammenfassung: Ein Großteil der biomedizinischen Forschung ist beobachtend, und die Qualität der veröffentlichten Berichte über diese Forschung ist oft unzureichend. Dies behindert die Beurteilung der Stärken und Schwächen einer Studie und ihrer Übertragbarkeit. Die Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE-) Initiative hat Empfehlungen entwickelt, was in einem akkuraten und vollständigen Bericht einer Beobachtungsstudie enthalten sein sollte. Die Empfehlungen wurden von uns so definiert, dass sie 3Hauptstudientypen abdecken: Kohorten-, Fallkontroll- und Querschnittsstudien. Im September 2004 veranstalteten wir einen zweitägigen Workshop mit Methodikern, Forschern und Herausgebern wissenschaftlicher Zeitschriften, um eine Checkliste zu entwerfen. Anschließend wurde der Entwurf bei mehreren Treffen der Koordinierungsgruppe und nach E-Mail-Diskussionen mit der erweiterten STROBE-Gruppe revidiert und dabei empirische Evidenz und methodologische Aspekte berücksichtigt. Das Ergebnis des Workshops und des anschließenden iterativen Prozesses aus Beratung und Revision war eine Checkliste von 22Punkten (STROBE-Statement), die sich auf die Bereiche Titel, Abstract, Einleitung, Methoden, Ergebnisse und Diskussion eines Artikels beziehen. 18 der Punkte sind relevant für alle 3Studiendesigns, während 4 der Punkte spezifisch für Kohorten-, Fallkontroll- und Querschnittsstudien sind. Ein ausführlicher Begleitartikel (Explanation and Elaboration) wurde separat veröffentlicht und ist auf den Webseiten von PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine und Epidemiology frei zugänglich. Wir hoffen, dass das STROBE-Statement dazu beitragen kann, dass Beobachtungsstudien besser berichtet werde

Cardiovascular risk reduction with liraglutide: An exploratory mediation analysis of the leader trial

OBJECTIVE The Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results (LEADER) trial (ClinicalTrials.gov reg. no. NCT01179048) demonstrated a reduced risk of cardiovascular (CV) events for patients with type 2 diabetes who received the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist liraglutide versus placebo. The mechanisms behind this CV benefit remain unclear. We aimed to identify potential mediators for the CV benefit observed with liraglutide in the LEADER trial. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We performed exploratory analyses to identify potential mediators of the effect of liraglutide on major adverse CV events (MACE; composite of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) from the following candidates: Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), body weight, urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR), confirmed hypoglycemia, sulfonylurea use, insulin use, systolic blood pressure, and LDL cholesterol. These candidates were selected as CV risk factors on which liraglutide had an effect in LEADER such that a reduction in CV risk might result. We used two methods based on a Cox proportional hazards model and the new Vansteelandt method designed to use all available information from the mediator and to control for confounding factors. RESULTS Analyses using the Cox methods and Vansteelandt method indicated potential mediation by HbA1c (up to 41% and 83% mediation, respectively) and UACR (up to 29% and 33% mediation, respectively) on the effect of liraglutide on MACE. Mediation effects were small for other candidates. CONCLUSIONS These analyses identify HbA1c and, to a lesser extent, UACR as potential mediators of the CV effects of liraglutide. Whether either is a marker of an unmeasured factor or a true mediator remains a key question that invites further investigation

[The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting of observational studies].

Much of biomedical research is observational. The reporting of such research is often inadequate, which hampers the assessment of its strengths and weaknesses and of a study's generalizability. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Initiative developed recommendations on what should be included in an accurate and complete report of an observational study. We defined the scope of the recommendations to cover three main study designs: cohort, case-control, and cross-sectional studies. We convened a 2-day workshop in September 2004, with methodologists, researchers, and journal editors to draft a checklist of items. This list was subsequently revised during several meetings of the coordinating group and in e-mail discussions with the larger group of STROBE contributors, taking into account empirical evidence and methodological considerations. The workshop and the subsequent iterative process of consultation and revision resulted in a checklist of 22 items (the STROBE Statement) that relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to all three study designs and four are specific for cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional studies. A detailed Explanation and Elaboration document is published separately and is freely available on the web sites of PLoS Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and Epidemiology. We hope that the STROBE Statement will contribute to improving the quality of reporting of observational studies

Helicobacter pylori infection: relation with cardiovascular risk factors, ischaemic heart disease, and social class.

OBJECTIVE--To determine whether Helicobacter pylori infection is associated with the development of ischaemic heart disease and whether such infection can explain the social class inequality in ischaemic heart disease. DESIGN--Cardiovascular risk factor levels, prevalence of ischaemic heart disease (Rose questionnaire angina, and/or a history of myocardial infarction), and serum antibodies to H pylori (enzyme linked immunosorbent assay) were assessed in a cross sectional population based survey. SETTING--Belfast and surrounding districts, Northern Ireland. PARTICIPANTS--1182 men and 1198 women aged 25-64 years randomly selected from the Central Services Agency's general practitioner lists. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES--The relation of H pylori infection with cardiovascular risk factors and ischaemic heart disease. The association of social class with ischaemic heart disease. RESULTS--Systolic and diastolic blood pressure, plasma viscosity, and total cholesterol were not associated with H pylori infection. A weak negative association existed between H pylori infection and fibrinogen (mean (SE) difference in fibrinogen between infected and uninfected individuals -0.09 (0.04) g/l, P = 0.02) and between infection in women and high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (mean (SE) difference in HDL cholesterol between infected and uninfected individuals -0.06 (0.02) mmol/l, P = 0.006). A potentially important association was demonstrated between H pylori infection and ischaemic heart disease but this did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.51 (0.93 to 2.45), P = 0.1). Social class was associated with ischaemic heart disease independently of cardiovascular risk factors and H pylori infection (odds ratio, manual v non-manual (95% CI) 1.82 (1.14 to 2.91), P = 0.01). CONCLUSION--H pylori may be independently associated with the development of ischaemic heart disease but if this is so the mechanism by which this effect is exerted is not through increased concentration of plasma fibrinogen. H pylori infection does not explain the social class inequality in ischaemic heart disease which exists independently of known cardiovascular risk factors