Single-group studies in leading physical therapy journals commonly make inappropriate conclusions regarding treatment effect modifiers.: A systematic review

Tayla J. Douglas; Elin Rosenberg Čemažar; Natasha C. Pocovi; Mark J. Hancock

doi:10.1016/j.bjpt.2023.100520

Single-group studies in leading physical therapy journals commonly make inappropriate conclusions regarding treatment effect modifiers. A systematic review

Tayla J. Douglas, Elin Rosenberg Čemažar, Natasha C. Pocovi, Mark J. Hancock^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Department of Health Sciences

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

33 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Characteristics that identify patients who respond differently to certain interventions are called treatment effect modifiers. Some studies inappropriately report the presence of treatment effect modifiers without adequate study designs. Objectives: To evaluate what proportion of single-group studies published in leading physical therapy journals inappropriately report treatment effect modifiers, and to assess whether the proportion varies over time or between journals. Methods: A systematic review was conducted of studies published in eight leading physical therapy journals since 2000. Eligible studies were single-group studies (e.g., cohort study or secondary analysis of treatment arm of randomised controlled trial) that investigated any condition, treatment or outcome. Studies that suggested participants with certain baseline characteristics responded better/or worse to the treatment, were considered to have reported inappropriately. Studies reporting that participants with certain baseline characteristics had improved outcomes but did not state it was due to the treatment were considered to have reported appropriately. The proportion of inappropriate reporting was compared over time and between journals. Results: Of the 145 included studies, 73 (50.3%) were categorised as inappropriately reporting treatment effect modifiers. The proportion of inappropriate reporting was highest in the most recent period, 2018 – 2022 (59.6%) and 2006 – 2011 (55.6%). The proportion of inappropriate reporting varied substantially between journals from 0% (Journal of Physiotherapy) to 91.7% (Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy). Conclusions: A large proportion (50.3%) of single-arm studies in leading physical therapy journals inappropriately report treatment effect modifiers. This inappropriate reporting risks misleading clinicians when selecting interventions for individual patients.

Original language	English
Article number	100520
Pages (from-to)	1-8
Number of pages	8
Journal	Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy
Volume	27
Issue number	4
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjpt.2023.100520
Publication status	Published - 1 Jul 2023

Bibliographical note

Copyright the Author(s) 2023. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

Keywords

Baseline characteristics
Predictors of response
Systematic review
Treatment effect modifiers
Treatment outcome
Treatment response

Access to Document

10.1016/j.bjpt.2023.100520Licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Publisher version (open access)Final published version, 925 KBLicence: CC BY-NC-ND

Cite this

@article{3bb6b3b1eed847f98e549b0f929c1ec1,

title = "Single-group studies in leading physical therapy journals commonly make inappropriate conclusions regarding treatment effect modifiers.: A systematic review",

abstract = "Background: Characteristics that identify patients who respond differently to certain interventions are called treatment effect modifiers. Some studies inappropriately report the presence of treatment effect modifiers without adequate study designs. Objectives: To evaluate what proportion of single-group studies published in leading physical therapy journals inappropriately report treatment effect modifiers, and to assess whether the proportion varies over time or between journals. Methods: A systematic review was conducted of studies published in eight leading physical therapy journals since 2000. Eligible studies were single-group studies (e.g., cohort study or secondary analysis of treatment arm of randomised controlled trial) that investigated any condition, treatment or outcome. Studies that suggested participants with certain baseline characteristics responded better/or worse to the treatment, were considered to have reported inappropriately. Studies reporting that participants with certain baseline characteristics had improved outcomes but did not state it was due to the treatment were considered to have reported appropriately. The proportion of inappropriate reporting was compared over time and between journals. Results: Of the 145 included studies, 73 (50.3%) were categorised as inappropriately reporting treatment effect modifiers. The proportion of inappropriate reporting was highest in the most recent period, 2018 – 2022 (59.6%) and 2006 – 2011 (55.6%). The proportion of inappropriate reporting varied substantially between journals from 0% (Journal of Physiotherapy) to 91.7% (Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy). Conclusions: A large proportion (50.3%) of single-arm studies in leading physical therapy journals inappropriately report treatment effect modifiers. This inappropriate reporting risks misleading clinicians when selecting interventions for individual patients.",

keywords = "Baseline characteristics, Predictors of response, Systematic review, Treatment effect modifiers, Treatment outcome, Treatment response",

author = "Douglas, {Tayla J.} and {Rosenberg {\v C}ema{\v z}ar}, Elin and Pocovi, {Natasha C.} and Hancock, {Mark J.}",

note = "Copyright the Author(s) 2023. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.",

year = "2023",

month = jul,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.bjpt.2023.100520",

language = "English",

volume = "27",

pages = "1--8",

journal = "Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy",

issn = "1413-3555",

publisher = "Revista Brasileira de Fisioterapia",

number = "4",

}

Single-group studies in leading physical therapy journals commonly make inappropriate conclusions regarding treatment effect modifiers. A systematic review. / Douglas, Tayla J.; Rosenberg Čemažar, Elin; Pocovi, Natasha C. et al.
In: Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy, Vol. 27, No. 4, 100520, 01.07.2023, p. 1-8.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Single-group studies in leading physical therapy journals commonly make inappropriate conclusions regarding treatment effect modifiers.

T2 - A systematic review

AU - Douglas, Tayla J.

AU - Rosenberg Čemažar, Elin

AU - Pocovi, Natasha C.

AU - Hancock, Mark J.

N1 - Copyright the Author(s) 2023. Version archived for private and non-commercial use with the permission of the author/s and according to publisher conditions. For further rights please contact the publisher.

PY - 2023/7/1

Y1 - 2023/7/1

N2 - Background: Characteristics that identify patients who respond differently to certain interventions are called treatment effect modifiers. Some studies inappropriately report the presence of treatment effect modifiers without adequate study designs. Objectives: To evaluate what proportion of single-group studies published in leading physical therapy journals inappropriately report treatment effect modifiers, and to assess whether the proportion varies over time or between journals. Methods: A systematic review was conducted of studies published in eight leading physical therapy journals since 2000. Eligible studies were single-group studies (e.g., cohort study or secondary analysis of treatment arm of randomised controlled trial) that investigated any condition, treatment or outcome. Studies that suggested participants with certain baseline characteristics responded better/or worse to the treatment, were considered to have reported inappropriately. Studies reporting that participants with certain baseline characteristics had improved outcomes but did not state it was due to the treatment were considered to have reported appropriately. The proportion of inappropriate reporting was compared over time and between journals. Results: Of the 145 included studies, 73 (50.3%) were categorised as inappropriately reporting treatment effect modifiers. The proportion of inappropriate reporting was highest in the most recent period, 2018 – 2022 (59.6%) and 2006 – 2011 (55.6%). The proportion of inappropriate reporting varied substantially between journals from 0% (Journal of Physiotherapy) to 91.7% (Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy). Conclusions: A large proportion (50.3%) of single-arm studies in leading physical therapy journals inappropriately report treatment effect modifiers. This inappropriate reporting risks misleading clinicians when selecting interventions for individual patients.

AB - Background: Characteristics that identify patients who respond differently to certain interventions are called treatment effect modifiers. Some studies inappropriately report the presence of treatment effect modifiers without adequate study designs. Objectives: To evaluate what proportion of single-group studies published in leading physical therapy journals inappropriately report treatment effect modifiers, and to assess whether the proportion varies over time or between journals. Methods: A systematic review was conducted of studies published in eight leading physical therapy journals since 2000. Eligible studies were single-group studies (e.g., cohort study or secondary analysis of treatment arm of randomised controlled trial) that investigated any condition, treatment or outcome. Studies that suggested participants with certain baseline characteristics responded better/or worse to the treatment, were considered to have reported inappropriately. Studies reporting that participants with certain baseline characteristics had improved outcomes but did not state it was due to the treatment were considered to have reported appropriately. The proportion of inappropriate reporting was compared over time and between journals. Results: Of the 145 included studies, 73 (50.3%) were categorised as inappropriately reporting treatment effect modifiers. The proportion of inappropriate reporting was highest in the most recent period, 2018 – 2022 (59.6%) and 2006 – 2011 (55.6%). The proportion of inappropriate reporting varied substantially between journals from 0% (Journal of Physiotherapy) to 91.7% (Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy). Conclusions: A large proportion (50.3%) of single-arm studies in leading physical therapy journals inappropriately report treatment effect modifiers. This inappropriate reporting risks misleading clinicians when selecting interventions for individual patients.

KW - Baseline characteristics

KW - Predictors of response

KW - Systematic review

KW - Treatment effect modifiers

KW - Treatment outcome

KW - Treatment response

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85165028675&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.bjpt.2023.100520

DO - 10.1016/j.bjpt.2023.100520

M3 - Review article

C2 - 37478542

AN - SCOPUS:85165028675

SN - 1413-3555

VL - 27

SP - 1

EP - 8

JO - Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy

JF - Brazilian Journal of Physical Therapy

IS - 4

M1 - 100520

ER -