Are Novel, Nonrandomized Analytic Methods Fit for Decision Making? The Need for Prospective, Controlled, and Transparent Validation

52Citations
Citations of this article
71Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Real-world data and patient-level data from completed randomized controlled trials are becoming available for secondary analysis on an unprecedented scale. A range of novel methodologies and study designs have been proposed for their analysis or combination. However, to make novel analytical methods acceptable for regulators and other decision makers will require their testing and validation in broadly the same way one would evaluate a new drug: prospectively, well-controlled, and according to a pre-agreed plan. From a European regulators' perspective, the established methods qualification advice procedure with active participation of patient groups and other decision makers is an efficient and transparent platform for the development and validation of novel study designs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Eichler, H. G., Koenig, F., Arlett, P., Enzmann, H., Humphreys, A., Pétavy, F., … Rasi, G. (2020). Are Novel, Nonrandomized Analytic Methods Fit for Decision Making? The Need for Prospective, Controlled, and Transparent Validation. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 107(4), 773–779. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.1638

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free