Abstract
BackgroundThe number of individual patient data meta-analyses published is very low especially in surgical domains. Our aim was to assess the feasibility of individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery by determining whether trialists agree to send IPD for eligible trials.MethodsWe performed a literature search to identify relevant research questions in orthopaedic surgery. For each question, we developed a protocol synopsis for an IPD meta-analysis and identified all related randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with results published since 2000. Corresponding authors of these RCTs were sent personalized emails that presented a project for an IPD meta-analysis corresponding to one of the research questions, with a link to the protocol synopsis, and asking for IPD from their RCT. We guaranteed patient confidentiality and secure data storage, and offered co-authorship and coverage of costs related to extraction.ResultsWe identified 38 research questions and 273 RCTs related to these questions. We could contact 217 of the 273 corresponding authors (79 %; 56 had unavailable or non-functional email addresses) and received 68/273 responses (25 %): 21 authors refused to share IPD, 10 stated that our request was under consideration and 37 agreed to send IPD. Four corresponding authors required authorship and three others asked for financial support to send the IPD. Overall, we could obtain IPD for 5,110 of 33,602 eligible patients (15 %). Among the 38 research questions, only one IPD meta-analysis could be potentially initiated because we could receive IPD for more than 50 % of participants.ConclusionThe present study illustrates the difficulties in initiating IPD meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery. Significant efforts must be made to improve data sharing.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12916-015-0376-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Highlights
The number of individual patient data meta-analyses published is very low especially in surgical domains
Development of protocol synopsis of individual patient data (IPD) MA for each clinical research question For each clinical research question, we developed a standardized protocol synopsis for an IPD MA, with the background and objectives sections derived from the corresponding systematic review with MA of aggregated data and the methods section based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions [27]
Identification of clinical research questions in orthopaedic surgery Additional file 4 describes the flow of the selection of systematic reviews
Summary
The number of individual patient data meta-analyses published is very low especially in surgical domains. Our aim was to assess the feasibility of individual patient data (IPD) meta-analyses in orthopaedic surgery by determining whether trialists agree to send IPD for eligible trials. Many researchers are reluctant to share IPD because of patient protection, ownership [5], or the cost [1, 6] to ensure confidentiality and anonymity of patients and archiving the data [1, 7]. Additional pitfalls, such as the availability of data [8] with practical difficulties related to data sharing many years after the completion of a trial, potentiate the risk of an incomplete data sharing process. Data sharing in orthopaedic surgery relies mainly on cooperation from the clinical trialists who generate and maintain these data
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
