Goriacko (2024)

COVID-19

Infectious diseases • Ehr Data • US

Study Metrics
Total Sample 716
Treatment Group 244
Control Group 472
PICO Comparisons 1
Quality Indicators
Transparency High
DAG Usage Yes
QBA Performed No

Study Information

First Author: Goriacko
Publication Year: 2024
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/zxae161
Preprint: No preprint

Institution & Funding

Institution Type: Academic
Institutions: Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Carolinas Medical Center
Funding: Declared: Public
Funding Institutions: Financial support for this study was provided in part by a grant from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (K12HS026396). The funder had no role in designing the study, interpreting the data, or writing or publishing the report.

Study Context

Disease: COVID-19
Disease Category: Infectious diseases
Data Type: Electronic Health Records
Number of Data Sources: 1
Geography: US
Eligible Sample: 3293.0
Number of Emulations: 2
Number of Treatments: 2

Analytical Methods

Matching Method: Coarsened exact matching
Analysis Method: Logistic regression
Estimand: ITT, PP

Quality Methods

Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) Used
Quantitative Bias Analysis (QBA) Not Performed
Good Practice: This study employed advanced methodological approaches including DAG methodology.

Target Trial Information

Target Trial Name: REMAP-CAP
Registration Number: NCT02735707
Target Trial DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2100433

TTE vs RCT Comparisons

Detailed comparison between Target Trial Emulation results and corresponding Randomized Controlled Trial outcomes.

28-day all-cause mortality
REMAP-CAP
OR Efficacy
Population

Critically ill patients with COVID-19

Intervention

tocilizumab

Comparison

no tocilizumab

Outcome

28-day all-cause mortality

RCT Result

0.76

95% CI: [0.66, 0.88]


vs
TTE Result

0.86

95% CI: [0.52, 1.44]

Concordance Assessment
Confidence Interval Overlap: Yes
CIs overlap, suggesting concordance
Direction Agreement: Same Direction
Both point to similar conclusion

Transparency Indicators

Protocol Registration Available
Data Sharing Not Available
Code Sharing Not Available
Overall Transparency Score:
High Transparency - This study meets good transparency standards.

Conflicts & Funding

Conflicts of Interest: Declared: None
Funding Source: Declared: Public
Funding Institutions: Financial support for this study was provided in part by a grant from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (K12HS026396). The funder had no role in designing the study, interpreting the data, or writing or publishing the report.