Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

How to Assess a Prognostic Study

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Evidence-Based Surgery

  • 621 Accesses

Abstract

Prognostic studies examine the effect of variables, like surgical interventions , on disease progression. When posed with a clinical question around outcomes and prognosis , clinicians need to know how to best answer it by searching the literature. Prognostic studies can have a variety of designs; the optimal design depends on the question posed. Generally, observational studies provide the highest confidence in estimates for prognosis. The evaluation of a prognostic study hinges on six questions: (1) Is the sample representative of my patient? (2) Is the follow-up sufficiently long and complete? (3) Are the assessed outcomes objective and unbiased? (4) How likely are the outcomes to occur over time? (5) How precise are the estimates? and (6) Can I apply the results to my practice or patient? Using a clinical example, this chapter demonstrates how to identify and appraise prognostic literature by answering each question.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Moons KGM, Vergouwe Y, Grobbee DE, Altman DG. Prognosis and prognostic research: what, why, and how? BMJ. 2009;338:375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mack JW, Joffe S. Communicating about prognosis: ethical responsibilities of pediatricians and parents. Pediatrics. 2014;133(Suppl 1):S24–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Randolph AG, Guyatt GH, Richardson WS. Prognosis in the intensive care unit: finding accurate and useful estimates for counseling patients. Crit Care Med. 1998;26:767–72.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Italiano A. Prognostic or predictive? It’s time to get back to definitions! J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:4718; author reply 4718–9.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Barton S. Which clinical studies provide the best evidence? The best RCT still trumps the best observational study. BMJ. 2000;321:255–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Iorio A SF, Falavigna M. Use of GRADE for assessment of evidence about prognosis: rating confidence in estimates of event rates in broad categories of patients. BMJ. 2015;350.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Stassano P, Di Tommaso L, Monaco M, Iorio F, Pepino P, Spampinato N, et al. Aortic valve replacement: a prospective randomized evaluation of mechanical versus biological valves in patients ages 55 to 70 years. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;54:1862–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hansebout RR, Cornacchi SD, Haines T, Goldsmith CH. How to use an article about prognosis. Can J Surg. 2009;52:328–36.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Gamble JM. An introduction to the fundamentals of cohort and case-control studies. Can J Hosp Pharm. 2014;67:366–72.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Berger ML, Dreyer N, Anderson F, Towse A, Sedrakyan A, Normand SL. Prospective observational studies to assess comparative effectiveness: the ISPOR good research practices task force report. Value Health. 2012;15:217–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Thiese MS. Observational and interventional study design types; an overview. Biochem Med (Zagreb). 2014;24:199–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Goldstone AB, Chiu P, Baiocchi M, Lingala B, Patrick WL, Fischbein MP, et al. Mechanical or biologic prostheses for aortic-valve and mitral-valve replacement. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:1847–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mihailovic A, Bell CM, Urbach DR. Users’ guide to the surgical literature. Case-control studies in surgical journals. Can J Surg. 2005;48:148–51.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sleder A, Tackett S, Cerasale M, Mittal C, Isseh I, Radjef R, et al. Socioeconomic and racial disparities: a case-control study of patients receiving transcatheter aortic valve replacement for severe aortic stenosis. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities. 2017;4:1189–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Song JW, Chung KC. Observational studies: cohort and case-control studies. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126:2234–42.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hansebout RR, Cornacchi SD, Haines T, Goldsmith CH. User’s guide to the surgical literature: how to use an article about prognosis. Can J Surg. 2009;52(4):328–36.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Banerjee A, Chaudhury S. Statistics without tears: populations and samples. Ind Psychiatry J. 2010;19:60–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Randolph AG CD, Guyatt G. Prognosis. In: Guyatt G, Rennie D, Meade MO, Cook DJ, editors. Users’ guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based clinical practice. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2018.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Farrokhyar F, Bajammal S, Kahnamoui K, Bhandari M. Practical tips for surgical research. Ensuring balanced groups in surgical trials. Can J Surg. 2010;53:418–23.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Christenfeld NJ, Sloan RP, Carroll D, Greenland S. Risk factors, confounding, and the illusion of statistical control. Psychosom Med. 2004;66:868–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Akl EA, Briel M, You JJ, Sun X, Johnston BC, Busse JW, et al. Potential impact on estimated treatment effects of information lost to follow-up in randomised controlled trials (LOST-IT): systematic review. BMJ. 2012;344:e2809.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jaffer IH, Whitlock RP. A mechanical heart valve is the best choice. Heart Asia. 2016;8:62–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Cannegieter SC, Rosendaal FR, Wintzen AR, van der Meer FJ, Vandenbroucke JP, Briet E. Optimal oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with mechanical heart valves. N Engl J Med. 1995;333:11–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Carlson MD, Morrison RS. Study design, precision, and validity in observational studies. J Palliat Med. 2009;12:77–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Walton MK, Powers JH 3rd, Hobart J, Patric D, Marquis P, Vamvakas S, et al. Clinical outcome assessments: conceptual foundation-report of the ISPOR clinical outcomes assessment—emerging good practices for outcomes research task force. Value Health. 2015;18:741–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Russell SD, Saval MA, Robbins JL, Ellestad MH, Gottlieb SS, Handberg EM, et al. New York heart association functional class predicts exercise parameters in the current era. Am Heart J. 2009;158:S24–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Rich JT, Neely JG, Paniello RC, Voelker CC, Nussenbaum B, Wang EW. A practical guide to understanding Kaplan-Meier curves. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;143:331–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. du Prel JB, Hommel G, Rohrig B, Blettner M. Confidence interval or p-value?: part 4 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications. Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2009;106:335–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Messe SR, Acker MA, Kasner SE, et al. Stroke after aortic valve surgery: results from a prospective cohort. Circulation. 2014;129:2253–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Gawande A. Two hundred years of surgery. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:1716–23.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Maganti M, Rao V, Brister S, Ivanov J. Decreasing mortality for coronary artery bypass surgery in octogenarians. Can J Cardiol. 2009;25:e32–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Saurabh Gupta

  2. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, Hamilton Health Sciences, Hamilton General Hospital, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Kevin Kim

  3. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, Department of Medicine, Division of Cardiology & Critical Care, Population Health Research Institute, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Emilie Belley-Côté

  4. Department of Surgery, Division of Cardiac Surgery, Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Population Health Research Institute, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Richard P. Whitlock

Authors
  1. Saurabh Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kevin Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Emilie Belley-Côté
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Richard P. Whitlock
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard P. Whitlock .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Achilles Thoma

  2. Department of Surgery, Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Sheila Sprague

  3. Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Sophocles H. Voineskos

  4. Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact (HEI), McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada

    Charles H. Goldsmith

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Gupta, S., Kim, K., Belley-Côté, E., Whitlock, R.P. (2019). How to Assess a Prognostic Study. In: Thoma, A., Sprague, S., Voineskos, S., Goldsmith, C. (eds) Evidence-Based Surgery. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05120-4_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05120-4_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-05119-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-05120-4

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation