Soer, Remko

English

University of Groningen

   University of GroningenThe rise of real world evidence and its role for technologySoer, RemkoPublished in:Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal RehabilitationDOI:10.3233/BMR-215005IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite fromit. Please check the document version below.Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of recordPublication date:2021Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research databaseCitation for published version (APA):Soer, R. (2021). The rise of real world evidence and its role for technology. Journal of Back andMusculoskeletal Rehabilitation, 34(6), 903-904. https://doi.org/10.3233/BMR-215005CopyrightOther than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of theauthor(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license.More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne-amendment.Take-down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons thenumber of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.Download date: 20-11-2022Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation 34 (2021) 903–904 903DOI 10.3233/BMR-215005IOS PressFrom the EditorThe rise of real world evidence and its rolefor technologyRemko Soera,baFaculty of Health and Physical Activity, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Enschede, The NetherlandsbGroningen Pain Center, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen,The NetherlandsTel.: +31 612750780; E-mail: r.soer@saxion.nlFor decades, clinicians and researchers have used ahierarchy pyramid for the determination of evidencelevels. In this pyramid, weaker study designs such asbasic science or case series are presented at the bottom,followed by case-control, cohorts, randomized con-trolled trials (RCTs) and at the top meta-analyses. Thishas taught us the importance of high quality studies.When performed well, the RCT study design will pro-vide valuable knowledge on the effect of a certain inter-vention and can still be concerned the gold standard todemonstrate internal validity for original studies. Ap-plicability, external validity, whether an interventionalso has a good theoretical fundament, or will finally beadopted and implemented by healthcare practitionersor the target group, however, are different aspects. Inthat matter, some have also stated that the n− 1 trial isthe most important for applicability in practice [1].More and more often, studies appear that have beencarried out within the context of the patient, makinguse of so called real world data. While this field of re-search is in development, designs are less strong, i.e.controlled compared to the RCT, they might providevaluable evidence of how interventions are truly re-ceived by patients. In this issue, You and colleagues [2]present the effects of a multidisciplinary rehabilitationprogram established in the real world, concluding thatresults found in the RCT indeed reflect those observedin real-world practice.Furthermore, the role of the RCT is questioned as agood fit for the evaluation of telemedicine services [3].Ambulant technologies, including activity and heartrate monitors or stress applications, have evolved toreliable and good alternatives to gold (lab) standardsand are therefore emerging technologies for researchin patients’ daily environment. In the current issue Ne-grini and colleagues have reviewed the current state ofthese activity monitors for patients with musculoskele-tal disorders. They conclude that although, generally,activity monitors may be considered useful, there isstill a large heterogeneity between trackers which limitsstandardization [4].Next to ambulant technologies, in this issue, authorspresent emerging technologies such as electromyogra-phy to study the effect of manual techniques for ankledorsiflexion syndrome, for the use of external loads forgluteus medius training and for obtaining the most er-gonomic posture during breastfeeding. The last emerg-ing technology discussed here will be the use of ul-trasound. While the ethical discussion for the use andmisuse of ultrasound for diagnostics in care as usualremains, we can already see that for research purposes,ultrasound becomes an indispensable piece of technol-ogy. In the current issue, we will present a study usingultrasound to guide injection therapy for shoulder pain,and study the applicability of ultrasound as an acces-sible and affordable alternative than CT-scan to modellumbar vertebrae.For researchers and practitioners with limited accessto literature, BMR publishes all review articles as freeISSN 1053-8127/$35.00 c© 2021 – IOS Press. All rights reserved.904 R. Soer / The rise of real world evidence and its role for technologyto read. Moreover, the Editor’s Choice in this Novem-ber issue is rewarded to an impactful paper by Du andcolleagues, who performed an important evaluation inthe fixation treatment of upper arm after surgery of triadinjury of the elbow [5]. We congratulate the authors ontheir important work in this field of research.Enjoy reading all articles in this new issue!All the best,Remko Soer, PhD, MSc, Pt.Executive EditorJournal of Back and Musculoskeletal RehabilitationReferences[1] Murad MH, Asi N, Alsawas M, et al. New evidence pyramid.BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine. 2016; 21: 125-127.[2] You DS, Ziadni MS, Cooley CE et al. Effectiveness of a multi-disciplinary rehabilitation program in real-world patients withchronic back pain: A pilot cohort data analysis. J Back Muscu-loskelet Rehabil. 2021; 34(6): 965-973.[3] Jansen-Kosterink S, Vollenbroek-Hutten M, Hermens, H. Arenewed framework for the evaluation of telemedicine. In the8th International Conference on eHealth, Telemedicine, andSocial Medicine: eTELEMED. 2016.[4] Negrini F, de Sire A, Lazzarini SG et al. Reliability of activ-ity monitors for physical activity assessment in patients withmusculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review. J Back Muscu-loskelet Rehabil. 2021; 34(6): 915-923.[5] Shenxing D, Lihong W, Bangjian H et al. Dynamic fixationusing rigid tape in rehabilitation after surgery of terrible triadinjury of the elbow: A randomized trial. J Back MusculoskeletRehabil. 2021; 34(6): 957-964.

The rise of real world evidence and its role for technology

NARCIS 

ARTS repository - University of Groningen

   University of GroningenThe rise of real world evidence and its role for technologySoer, RemkoPublished in:Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal RehabilitationDOI:10.3233/BMR-215005IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite fromit. Please check the document version below.Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of recordPublication date:2021Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research databaseCitation for published version (APA):Soer, R. (2021). The rise of real world evidence and its role for technology. Journal of Back andMusculoskeletal Rehabilitation, 34(6), 903-904. https://doi.org/10.3233/BMR-215005CopyrightOther than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of theauthor(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license.More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne-amendment.Take-down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons thenumber of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.Download date: 10-09-2023Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation 34 (2021) 903–904 903DOI 10.3233/BMR-215005IOS PressFrom the EditorThe rise of real world evidence and its rolefor technologyRemko Soera,baFaculty of Health and Physical Activity, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Enschede, The NetherlandsbGroningen Pain Center, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen,The NetherlandsTel.: +31 612750780; E-mail: r.soer@saxion.nlFor decades, clinicians and researchers have used ahierarchy pyramid for the determination of evidencelevels. In this pyramid, weaker study designs such asbasic science or case series are presented at the bottom,followed by case-control, cohorts, randomized con-trolled trials (RCTs) and at the top meta-analyses. Thishas taught us the importance of high quality studies.When performed well, the RCT study design will pro-vide valuable knowledge on the effect of a certain inter-vention and can still be concerned the gold standard todemonstrate internal validity for original studies. Ap-plicability, external validity, whether an interventionalso has a good theoretical fundament, or will finally beadopted and implemented by healthcare practitionersor the target group, however, are different aspects. Inthat matter, some have also stated that the n− 1 trial isthe most important for applicability in practice [1].More and more often, studies appear that have beencarried out within the context of the patient, makinguse of so called real world data. While this field of re-search is in development, designs are less strong, i.e.controlled compared to the RCT, they might providevaluable evidence of how interventions are truly re-ceived by patients. In this issue, You and colleagues [2]present the effects of a multidisciplinary rehabilitationprogram established in the real world, concluding thatresults found in the RCT indeed reflect those observedin real-world practice.Furthermore, the role of the RCT is questioned as agood fit for the evaluation of telemedicine services [3].Ambulant technologies, including activity and heartrate monitors or stress applications, have evolved toreliable and good alternatives to gold (lab) standardsand are therefore emerging technologies for researchin patients’ daily environment. In the current issue Ne-grini and colleagues have reviewed the current state ofthese activity monitors for patients with musculoskele-tal disorders. They conclude that although, generally,activity monitors may be considered useful, there isstill a large heterogeneity between trackers which limitsstandardization [4].Next to ambulant technologies, in this issue, authorspresent emerging technologies such as electromyogra-phy to study the effect of manual techniques for ankledorsiflexion syndrome, for the use of external loads forgluteus medius training and for obtaining the most er-gonomic posture during breastfeeding. The last emerg-ing technology discussed here will be the use of ul-trasound. While the ethical discussion for the use andmisuse of ultrasound for diagnostics in care as usualremains, we can already see that for research purposes,ultrasound becomes an indispensable piece of technol-ogy. In the current issue, we will present a study usingultrasound to guide injection therapy for shoulder pain,and study the applicability of ultrasound as an acces-sible and affordable alternative than CT-scan to modellumbar vertebrae.For researchers and practitioners with limited accessto literature, BMR publishes all review articles as freeISSN 1053-8127/$35.00 c© 2021 – IOS Press. All rights reserved.904 R. Soer / The rise of real world evidence and its role for technologyto read. Moreover, the Editor’s Choice in this Novem-ber issue is rewarded to an impactful paper by Du andcolleagues, who performed an important evaluation inthe fixation treatment of upper arm after surgery of triadinjury of the elbow [5]. We congratulate the authors ontheir important work in this field of research.Enjoy reading all articles in this new issue!All the best,Remko Soer, PhD, MSc, Pt.Executive EditorJournal of Back and Musculoskeletal RehabilitationReferences[1] Murad MH, Asi N, Alsawas M, et al. New evidence pyramid.BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine. 2016; 21: 125-127.[2] You DS, Ziadni MS, Cooley CE et al. Effectiveness of a multi-disciplinary rehabilitation program in real-world patients withchronic back pain: A pilot cohort data analysis. J Back Muscu-loskelet Rehabil. 2021; 34(6): 965-973.[3] Jansen-Kosterink S, Vollenbroek-Hutten M, Hermens, H. Arenewed framework for the evaluation of telemedicine. In the8th International Conference on eHealth, Telemedicine, andSocial Medicine: eTELEMED. 2016.[4] Negrini F, de Sire A, Lazzarini SG et al. Reliability of activ-ity monitors for physical activity assessment in patients withmusculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review. J Back Muscu-loskelet Rehabil. 2021; 34(6): 915-923.[5] Shenxing D, Lihong W, Bangjian H et al. Dynamic fixationusing rigid tape in rehabilitation after surgery of terrible triadinjury of the elbow: A randomized trial. J Back MusculoskeletRehabil. 2021; 34(6): 957-964.

   University of GroningenThe rise of real world evidence and its role for technologySoer, RemkoPublished in:Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal RehabilitationDOI:10.3233/BMR-215005IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite fromit. Please check the document version below.Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of recordPublication date:2021Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research databaseCitation for published version (APA):Soer, R. (2021). The rise of real world evidence and its role for technology. Journal of Back andMusculoskeletal Rehabilitation, 34(6), 903-904. https://doi.org/10.3233/BMR-215005CopyrightOther than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of theauthor(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license.More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne-amendment.Take-down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons thenumber of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.Download date: 21-06-2022Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation 34 (2021) 903–904 903DOI 10.3233/BMR-215005IOS PressFrom the EditorThe rise of real world evidence and its rolefor technologyRemko Soera,baFaculty of Health and Physical Activity, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Enschede, The NetherlandsbGroningen Pain Center, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen,The NetherlandsTel.: +31 612750780; E-mail: r.soer@saxion.nlFor decades, clinicians and researchers have used ahierarchy pyramid for the determination of evidencelevels. In this pyramid, weaker study designs such asbasic science or case series are presented at the bottom,followed by case-control, cohorts, randomized con-trolled trials (RCTs) and at the top meta-analyses. Thishas taught us the importance of high quality studies.When performed well, the RCT study design will pro-vide valuable knowledge on the effect of a certain inter-vention and can still be concerned the gold standard todemonstrate internal validity for original studies. Ap-plicability, external validity, whether an interventionalso has a good theoretical fundament, or will finally beadopted and implemented by healthcare practitionersor the target group, however, are different aspects. Inthat matter, some have also stated that the n− 1 trial isthe most important for applicability in practice [1].More and more often, studies appear that have beencarried out within the context of the patient, makinguse of so called real world data. While this field of re-search is in development, designs are less strong, i.e.controlled compared to the RCT, they might providevaluable evidence of how interventions are truly re-ceived by patients. In this issue, You and colleagues [2]present the effects of a multidisciplinary rehabilitationprogram established in the real world, concluding thatresults found in the RCT indeed reflect those observedin real-world practice.Furthermore, the role of the RCT is questioned as agood fit for the evaluation of telemedicine services [3].Ambulant technologies, including activity and heartrate monitors or stress applications, have evolved toreliable and good alternatives to gold (lab) standardsand are therefore emerging technologies for researchin patients’ daily environment. In the current issue Ne-grini and colleagues have reviewed the current state ofthese activity monitors for patients with musculoskele-tal disorders. They conclude that although, generally,activity monitors may be considered useful, there isstill a large heterogeneity between trackers which limitsstandardization [4].Next to ambulant technologies, in this issue, authorspresent emerging technologies such as electromyogra-phy to study the effect of manual techniques for ankledorsiflexion syndrome, for the use of external loads forgluteus medius training and for obtaining the most er-gonomic posture during breastfeeding. The last emerg-ing technology discussed here will be the use of ul-trasound. While the ethical discussion for the use andmisuse of ultrasound for diagnostics in care as usualremains, we can already see that for research purposes,ultrasound becomes an indispensable piece of technol-ogy. In the current issue, we will present a study usingultrasound to guide injection therapy for shoulder pain,and study the applicability of ultrasound as an acces-sible and affordable alternative than CT-scan to modellumbar vertebrae.For researchers and practitioners with limited accessto literature, BMR publishes all review articles as freeISSN 1053-8127/$35.00 c© 2021 – IOS Press. All rights reserved.904 R. Soer / The rise of real world evidence and its role for technologyto read. Moreover, the Editor’s Choice in this Novem-ber issue is rewarded to an impactful paper by Du andcolleagues, who performed an important evaluation inthe fixation treatment of upper arm after surgery of triadinjury of the elbow [5]. We congratulate the authors ontheir important work in this field of research.Enjoy reading all articles in this new issue!All the best,Remko Soer, PhD, MSc, Pt.Executive EditorJournal of Back and Musculoskeletal RehabilitationReferences[1] Murad MH, Asi N, Alsawas M, et al. New evidence pyramid.BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine. 2016; 21: 125-127.[2] You DS, Ziadni MS, Cooley CE et al. Effectiveness of a multi-disciplinary rehabilitation program in real-world patients withchronic back pain: A pilot cohort data analysis. J Back Muscu-loskelet Rehabil. 2021; 34(6): 965-973.[3] Jansen-Kosterink S, Vollenbroek-Hutten M, Hermens, H. Arenewed framework for the evaluation of telemedicine. In the8th International Conference on eHealth, Telemedicine, andSocial Medicine: eTELEMED. 2016.[4] Negrini F, de Sire A, Lazzarini SG et al. Reliability of activ-ity monitors for physical activity assessment in patients withmusculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review. J Back Muscu-loskelet Rehabil. 2021; 34(6): 915-923.[5] Shenxing D, Lihong W, Bangjian H et al. Dynamic fixationusing rigid tape in rehabilitation after surgery of terrible triadinjury of the elbow: A randomized trial. J Back MusculoskeletRehabil. 2021; 34(6): 957-964.

   University of GroningenThe rise of real world evidence and its role for technologySoer, RemkoPublished in:Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal RehabilitationDOI:10.3233/BMR-215005IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite fromit. Please check the document version below.Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of recordPublication date:2021Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research databaseCitation for published version (APA):Soer, R. (2021). The rise of real world evidence and its role for technology. Journal of Back andMusculoskeletal Rehabilitation, 34(6), 903-904. https://doi.org/10.3233/BMR-215005CopyrightOther than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of theauthor(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).The publication may also be distributed here under the terms of Article 25fa of the Dutch Copyright Act, indicated by the “Taverne” license.More information can be found on the University of Groningen website: https://www.rug.nl/library/open-access/self-archiving-pure/taverne-amendment.Take-down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons thenumber of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.Download date: 29-04-2023Journal of Back and Musculoskeletal Rehabilitation 34 (2021) 903–904 903DOI 10.3233/BMR-215005IOS PressFrom the EditorThe rise of real world evidence and its rolefor technologyRemko Soera,baFaculty of Health and Physical Activity, Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Enschede, The NetherlandsbGroningen Pain Center, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen,The NetherlandsTel.: +31 612750780; E-mail: r.soer@saxion.nlFor decades, clinicians and researchers have used ahierarchy pyramid for the determination of evidencelevels. In this pyramid, weaker study designs such asbasic science or case series are presented at the bottom,followed by case-control, cohorts, randomized con-trolled trials (RCTs) and at the top meta-analyses. Thishas taught us the importance of high quality studies.When performed well, the RCT study design will pro-vide valuable knowledge on the effect of a certain inter-vention and can still be concerned the gold standard todemonstrate internal validity for original studies. Ap-plicability, external validity, whether an interventionalso has a good theoretical fundament, or will finally beadopted and implemented by healthcare practitionersor the target group, however, are different aspects. Inthat matter, some have also stated that the n− 1 trial isthe most important for applicability in practice [1].More and more often, studies appear that have beencarried out within the context of the patient, makinguse of so called real world data. While this field of re-search is in development, designs are less strong, i.e.controlled compared to the RCT, they might providevaluable evidence of how interventions are truly re-ceived by patients. In this issue, You and colleagues [2]present the effects of a multidisciplinary rehabilitationprogram established in the real world, concluding thatresults found in the RCT indeed reflect those observedin real-world practice.Furthermore, the role of the RCT is questioned as agood fit for the evaluation of telemedicine services [3].Ambulant technologies, including activity and heartrate monitors or stress applications, have evolved toreliable and good alternatives to gold (lab) standardsand are therefore emerging technologies for researchin patients’ daily environment. In the current issue Ne-grini and colleagues have reviewed the current state ofthese activity monitors for patients with musculoskele-tal disorders. They conclude that although, generally,activity monitors may be considered useful, there isstill a large heterogeneity between trackers which limitsstandardization [4].Next to ambulant technologies, in this issue, authorspresent emerging technologies such as electromyogra-phy to study the effect of manual techniques for ankledorsiflexion syndrome, for the use of external loads forgluteus medius training and for obtaining the most er-gonomic posture during breastfeeding. The last emerg-ing technology discussed here will be the use of ul-trasound. While the ethical discussion for the use andmisuse of ultrasound for diagnostics in care as usualremains, we can already see that for research purposes,ultrasound becomes an indispensable piece of technol-ogy. In the current issue, we will present a study usingultrasound to guide injection therapy for shoulder pain,and study the applicability of ultrasound as an acces-sible and affordable alternative than CT-scan to modellumbar vertebrae.For researchers and practitioners with limited accessto literature, BMR publishes all review articles as freeISSN 1053-8127/$35.00 c© 2021 – IOS Press. All rights reserved.904 R. Soer / The rise of real world evidence and its role for technologyto read. Moreover, the Editor’s Choice in this Novem-ber issue is rewarded to an impactful paper by Du andcolleagues, who performed an important evaluation inthe fixation treatment of upper arm after surgery of triadinjury of the elbow [5]. We congratulate the authors ontheir important work in this field of research.Enjoy reading all articles in this new issue!All the best,Remko Soer, PhD, MSc, Pt.Executive EditorJournal of Back and Musculoskeletal RehabilitationReferences[1] Murad MH, Asi N, Alsawas M, et al. New evidence pyramid.BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine. 2016; 21: 125-127.[2] You DS, Ziadni MS, Cooley CE et al. Effectiveness of a multi-disciplinary rehabilitation program in real-world patients withchronic back pain: A pilot cohort data analysis. J Back Muscu-loskelet Rehabil. 2021; 34(6): 965-973.[3] Jansen-Kosterink S, Vollenbroek-Hutten M, Hermens, H. Arenewed framework for the evaluation of telemedicine. In the8th International Conference on eHealth, Telemedicine, andSocial Medicine: eTELEMED. 2016.[4] Negrini F, de Sire A, Lazzarini SG et al. Reliability of activ-ity monitors for physical activity assessment in patients withmusculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review. J Back Muscu-loskelet Rehabil. 2021; 34(6): 915-923.[5] Shenxing D, Lihong W, Bangjian H et al. Dynamic fixationusing rigid tape in rehabilitation after surgery of terrible triadinjury of the elbow: A randomized trial. J Back MusculoskeletRehabil. 2021; 34(6): 957-964.

https://pure.rug.nl/ws/files/193908629/bmr_2021_34_6_bmr_34_6_bmr215005_bmr_34_bmr215005.pdf

The rise of real world evidence and its role for technology

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Groningen

NARCIS

ARTS repository - University of Groningen

ARTS repository - University of Groningen

University of Groningen