Practice-Based Evidence Research in Rehabilitation: An Alternative to Randomized Controlled Trials and Traditional Observational Studies
Abstract Horn SD, DeJong G, Deutscher D. Practice-based evidence research in rehabilitation: an alternative to randomized controlled trials and traditional observational studies. Sound rigorous methods are needed by researchers and providers to address practical questions about risks, benefits, and...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation 2012-08, Vol.93 (8), p.S127-S137 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | S137 |
---|---|
container_issue | 8 |
container_start_page | S127 |
container_title | Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation |
container_volume | 93 |
creator | Horn, Susan D., PhD DeJong, Gerben, PhD Deutscher, Daniel, PhD, PT |
description | Abstract Horn SD, DeJong G, Deutscher D. Practice-based evidence research in rehabilitation: an alternative to randomized controlled trials and traditional observational studies. Sound rigorous methods are needed by researchers and providers to address practical questions about risks, benefits, and costs of interventions as they occur in routine clinical practice such as: Are treatments used in daily practice associated with intended outcomes? For whom does an intervention work best? With limited clinical resources, what are the best interventions to use for specific types of patients? Answers to such questions can help clinicians, patients, researchers, and health care administrators learn from, and improve, real-world everyday clinical practice. In this article, we describe existing research designs to demonstrate clinical usefulness and comparative effectiveness of rehabilitation treatments. We compare randomized controlled trials and observational cohort studies of various types, including those that use instrumental variables or propensity scores to control for potential patient or treatment selection effects. We argue that practice-based evidence (PBE) study designs include features that address limitations inherent in both randomized trials and traditional observational studies, and also reduce the need for instrumental variables and propensity scores methods. We give examples of how PBE designs have been used in various rehabilitation areas to determine better treatments for specific types of patients. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.10.031 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1032738233</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0003999312000068</els_id><sourcerecordid>1032738233</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-42a5b28395c2639121659aa688f7a2b336427db3472ab052c622c094c685bdd03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9Uk2LFDEQDaK44-of8CB99NJjUulPEWEc1g9YWNldwVuoTmrYjJnObJIeWH-BP9s0M3rw4CmvKu89qHrF2EvBl4KL5s12iftdWAIXIjeWXIpHbCFqCWUH4vtjtuCcy7Lve3nGnsW4zWVTS_GUnQF0Fe_afsF-fQ2ok9VUfsBIprg4WEOjpuKaImHQd4UdM77DwTqbMFk_vi1WY7FyicKY6wMVyRfXOBq_sz-zw9qPKXjnMrwNFl0s8l-GaOysRldcDZHCAU_VTZqMpficPdlkMr04vefs28eL2_Xn8vLq05f16rLUlRCprADrATrZ1xoa2QsQTd0jNl23aREGKZsKWjPIqgUceA26AdC8r3TT1YMxXJ6z10ffffD3E8WkdjZqcg5H8lNUgktoZQdSZiocqTr4GANt1D7YHYaHTFJzAmqr5gTUnMDcywlk0auT_zTsyPyV_Fl5Jrw7EihPebAUVNR2XrmxgXRSxtv_-7__R66dHa1G94MeKG79lGNxeQ4VQXF1M9_AfAIC-Jx_J38DIc2tAQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1032738233</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Practice-Based Evidence Research in Rehabilitation: An Alternative to Randomized Controlled Trials and Traditional Observational Studies</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><creator>Horn, Susan D., PhD ; DeJong, Gerben, PhD ; Deutscher, Daniel, PhD, PT</creator><creatorcontrib>Horn, Susan D., PhD ; DeJong, Gerben, PhD ; Deutscher, Daniel, PhD, PT</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Horn SD, DeJong G, Deutscher D. Practice-based evidence research in rehabilitation: an alternative to randomized controlled trials and traditional observational studies. Sound rigorous methods are needed by researchers and providers to address practical questions about risks, benefits, and costs of interventions as they occur in routine clinical practice such as: Are treatments used in daily practice associated with intended outcomes? For whom does an intervention work best? With limited clinical resources, what are the best interventions to use for specific types of patients? Answers to such questions can help clinicians, patients, researchers, and health care administrators learn from, and improve, real-world everyday clinical practice. In this article, we describe existing research designs to demonstrate clinical usefulness and comparative effectiveness of rehabilitation treatments. We compare randomized controlled trials and observational cohort studies of various types, including those that use instrumental variables or propensity scores to control for potential patient or treatment selection effects. We argue that practice-based evidence (PBE) study designs include features that address limitations inherent in both randomized trials and traditional observational studies, and also reduce the need for instrumental variables and propensity scores methods. We give examples of how PBE designs have been used in various rehabilitation areas to determine better treatments for specific types of patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-9993</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-821X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.10.031</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22840879</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Benchmarking ; Comparative effectiveness research ; Comparative Effectiveness Research - methods ; Evidence-Based Medicine - methods ; Humans ; Outcome Assessment (Health Care) ; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation ; Randomized controlled trials as topic ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods ; Rehabilitation ; Rehabilitation - methods ; Rehabilitation - standards ; Reproducibility of Results ; Research Design ; Treatment outcome</subject><ispartof>Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2012-08, Vol.93 (8), p.S127-S137</ispartof><rights>American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine</rights><rights>2012 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine</rights><rights>Copyright © 2012 American Congress of Rehabilitation Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-42a5b28395c2639121659aa688f7a2b336427db3472ab052c622c094c685bdd03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-42a5b28395c2639121659aa688f7a2b336427db3472ab052c622c094c685bdd03</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003999312000068$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22840879$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Horn, Susan D., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeJong, Gerben, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deutscher, Daniel, PhD, PT</creatorcontrib><title>Practice-Based Evidence Research in Rehabilitation: An Alternative to Randomized Controlled Trials and Traditional Observational Studies</title><title>Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation</title><addtitle>Arch Phys Med Rehabil</addtitle><description>Abstract Horn SD, DeJong G, Deutscher D. Practice-based evidence research in rehabilitation: an alternative to randomized controlled trials and traditional observational studies. Sound rigorous methods are needed by researchers and providers to address practical questions about risks, benefits, and costs of interventions as they occur in routine clinical practice such as: Are treatments used in daily practice associated with intended outcomes? For whom does an intervention work best? With limited clinical resources, what are the best interventions to use for specific types of patients? Answers to such questions can help clinicians, patients, researchers, and health care administrators learn from, and improve, real-world everyday clinical practice. In this article, we describe existing research designs to demonstrate clinical usefulness and comparative effectiveness of rehabilitation treatments. We compare randomized controlled trials and observational cohort studies of various types, including those that use instrumental variables or propensity scores to control for potential patient or treatment selection effects. We argue that practice-based evidence (PBE) study designs include features that address limitations inherent in both randomized trials and traditional observational studies, and also reduce the need for instrumental variables and propensity scores methods. We give examples of how PBE designs have been used in various rehabilitation areas to determine better treatments for specific types of patients.</description><subject>Benchmarking</subject><subject>Comparative effectiveness research</subject><subject>Comparative Effectiveness Research - methods</subject><subject>Evidence-Based Medicine - methods</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Outcome Assessment (Health Care)</subject><subject>Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Randomized controlled trials as topic</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods</subject><subject>Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Rehabilitation - methods</subject><subject>Rehabilitation - standards</subject><subject>Reproducibility of Results</subject><subject>Research Design</subject><subject>Treatment outcome</subject><issn>0003-9993</issn><issn>1532-821X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9Uk2LFDEQDaK44-of8CB99NJjUulPEWEc1g9YWNldwVuoTmrYjJnObJIeWH-BP9s0M3rw4CmvKu89qHrF2EvBl4KL5s12iftdWAIXIjeWXIpHbCFqCWUH4vtjtuCcy7Lve3nGnsW4zWVTS_GUnQF0Fe_afsF-fQ2ok9VUfsBIprg4WEOjpuKaImHQd4UdM77DwTqbMFk_vi1WY7FyicKY6wMVyRfXOBq_sz-zw9qPKXjnMrwNFl0s8l-GaOysRldcDZHCAU_VTZqMpficPdlkMr04vefs28eL2_Xn8vLq05f16rLUlRCprADrATrZ1xoa2QsQTd0jNl23aREGKZsKWjPIqgUceA26AdC8r3TT1YMxXJ6z10ffffD3E8WkdjZqcg5H8lNUgktoZQdSZiocqTr4GANt1D7YHYaHTFJzAmqr5gTUnMDcywlk0auT_zTsyPyV_Fl5Jrw7EihPebAUVNR2XrmxgXRSxtv_-7__R66dHa1G94MeKG79lGNxeQ4VQXF1M9_AfAIC-Jx_J38DIc2tAQ</recordid><startdate>20120801</startdate><enddate>20120801</enddate><creator>Horn, Susan D., PhD</creator><creator>DeJong, Gerben, PhD</creator><creator>Deutscher, Daniel, PhD, PT</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120801</creationdate><title>Practice-Based Evidence Research in Rehabilitation: An Alternative to Randomized Controlled Trials and Traditional Observational Studies</title><author>Horn, Susan D., PhD ; DeJong, Gerben, PhD ; Deutscher, Daniel, PhD, PT</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c411t-42a5b28395c2639121659aa688f7a2b336427db3472ab052c622c094c685bdd03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Benchmarking</topic><topic>Comparative effectiveness research</topic><topic>Comparative Effectiveness Research - methods</topic><topic>Evidence-Based Medicine - methods</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Outcome Assessment (Health Care)</topic><topic>Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Randomized controlled trials as topic</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods</topic><topic>Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Rehabilitation - methods</topic><topic>Rehabilitation - standards</topic><topic>Reproducibility of Results</topic><topic>Research Design</topic><topic>Treatment outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Horn, Susan D., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeJong, Gerben, PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deutscher, Daniel, PhD, PT</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Horn, Susan D., PhD</au><au>DeJong, Gerben, PhD</au><au>Deutscher, Daniel, PhD, PT</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Practice-Based Evidence Research in Rehabilitation: An Alternative to Randomized Controlled Trials and Traditional Observational Studies</atitle><jtitle>Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation</jtitle><addtitle>Arch Phys Med Rehabil</addtitle><date>2012-08-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>93</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>S127</spage><epage>S137</epage><pages>S127-S137</pages><issn>0003-9993</issn><eissn>1532-821X</eissn><abstract>Abstract Horn SD, DeJong G, Deutscher D. Practice-based evidence research in rehabilitation: an alternative to randomized controlled trials and traditional observational studies. Sound rigorous methods are needed by researchers and providers to address practical questions about risks, benefits, and costs of interventions as they occur in routine clinical practice such as: Are treatments used in daily practice associated with intended outcomes? For whom does an intervention work best? With limited clinical resources, what are the best interventions to use for specific types of patients? Answers to such questions can help clinicians, patients, researchers, and health care administrators learn from, and improve, real-world everyday clinical practice. In this article, we describe existing research designs to demonstrate clinical usefulness and comparative effectiveness of rehabilitation treatments. We compare randomized controlled trials and observational cohort studies of various types, including those that use instrumental variables or propensity scores to control for potential patient or treatment selection effects. We argue that practice-based evidence (PBE) study designs include features that address limitations inherent in both randomized trials and traditional observational studies, and also reduce the need for instrumental variables and propensity scores methods. We give examples of how PBE designs have been used in various rehabilitation areas to determine better treatments for specific types of patients.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>22840879</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.apmr.2011.10.031</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-9993 |
ispartof | Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation, 2012-08, Vol.93 (8), p.S127-S137 |
issn | 0003-9993 1532-821X |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1032738233 |
source | MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals |
subjects | Benchmarking Comparative effectiveness research Comparative Effectiveness Research - methods Evidence-Based Medicine - methods Humans Outcome Assessment (Health Care) Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Randomized controlled trials as topic Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - methods Rehabilitation Rehabilitation - methods Rehabilitation - standards Reproducibility of Results Research Design Treatment outcome |
title | Practice-Based Evidence Research in Rehabilitation: An Alternative to Randomized Controlled Trials and Traditional Observational Studies |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-30T09%3A44%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Practice-Based%20Evidence%20Research%20in%20Rehabilitation:%20An%20Alternative%20to%20Randomized%20Controlled%20Trials%20and%20Traditional%20Observational%20Studies&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20physical%20medicine%20and%20rehabilitation&rft.au=Horn,%20Susan%20D.,%20PhD&rft.date=2012-08-01&rft.volume=93&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=S127&rft.epage=S137&rft.pages=S127-S137&rft.issn=0003-9993&rft.eissn=1532-821X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.apmr.2011.10.031&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1032738233%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1032738233&rft_id=info:pmid/22840879&rft_els_id=S0003999312000068&rfr_iscdi=true |