title: Comparative effectiveness of colony-stimulating factors in febrile neutropenia prophylaxis: how results are affected by research design.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To examine the impact of research design on results in two published comparative effectiveness studies.
  
  
  METHODS
  Guidelines for comparative effectiveness research have recommended incorporating disease process in study design. Based on the recommendations, we develop a checklist of considerations and apply the checklist in review of two published studies on comparative effectiveness of colony-stimulating factors. Both studies used similar administrative claims data, but different methods, which resulted in directionally different estimates.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Major design differences between the two studies include: whether the timing of intervention in disease process was identified and whether study cohort and outcome assessment period were defined based on this temporal relationship.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Disease process and timing of intervention should be incorporated into the design of comparative effectiveness studies.
authors.affiliation: Optum, Eden Prairie, MN, USA.
authors.forename: Henry J
authors.initials: HJ
authors.lastname: Henk
authors.forename: Xiaoyan
authors.initials: X
authors.lastname: Li
authors.forename: Laura K
authors.initials: LK
authors.lastname: Becker
authors.forename: Hairong
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Xu
authors.forename: Qi
authors.initials: Q
authors.lastname: Gong
authors.forename: Robert G
authors.initials: RG
authors.lastname: Deeter
authors.forename: Richard L
authors.initials: RL
authors.lastname: Barron
mesh_terms: D057189:Checklist; D003115:Colony-Stimulating Factors / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D057186:Comparative Effectiveness Research; D064147:Febrile Neutropenia / Q000209:etiology / Q000517:prevention & control*; D006801:Humans; D009369:Neoplasms / Q000150:complications / Q000188:drug therapy*; D012107:Research Design
chemical_list: D003115:Colony-Stimulating Factors
keywords: chemotherapy; claims analysis; colony-stimulating factor; comparative effectiveness research; febrile neutropenia; filgrastim; pegfilgrastim; research methodology; retrospective analysis; sargramostim