In the past decade, real-world data (RWD) research has undergone significant transformations due to data aggregation and processing technologies. However, there is still a lack of consensus regarding the scope of RWD applications and the value of real-world evidence (RWE). This study briefly outlined the origins of the concept of RWD study and its early research scope to promote further development in this area. We also reviewed the understanding of RWD applications and research models from the five perspectives of healthcare professionals, medical institutions, decision-making departments, cross-regional cooperation model, and the practice of the One-Health model. Finally, we systematically summarized the renewed understanding of the value of RWE while looking ahead to the challenges and future developments in this field.

The selection of an appropriate control group is a critical component of pharmacoepidemiologic research.This article provides an interpretation of the control selection methods outlined in the Guide on Methodological Standards in Pharmacoepidemiology in China(2nd edition).According to the 2nd edition,studies are categorized into interventional and non-interventional research.In interventional research,control group options include placebo controls,no-treatment controls,active controls,and dose-response controls.For non-interventional research,the gold standard design is the active comparator new user(ACNU)design.When the ACNU design is not feasible,alternative control group strategies should be selected based on the research objective,data sources,exposure characteristics,and potential confounding.These alternatives may include non-user comparators,prevalent user comparators,self-controlled comparators,and external controls.Finally,this article compares the applicability,strengths,and limitations of various control group types.It aims to provide methodological guidance for the scientific selection of control groups in pharmacoepidemiologic studies and to support the conduct of high-quality research.

In the past decade, real-world data (RWD) research has undergone significant transformations due to data aggregation and processing technologies. However, there is still a lack of consensus regarding the scope of RWD applications and the value of real-world evidence (RWE). This study briefly outlined the origins of the concept of RWD study and its early research scope to promote further development in this area. We also reviewed the understanding of RWD applications and research models from the five perspectives of healthcare professionals, medical institutions, decision-making departments, cross-regional cooperation model, and the practice of the One-Health model. Finally, we systematically summarized the renewed understanding of the value of RWE while looking ahead to the challenges and future developments in this field.

The selection of an appropriate control group is a critical component of pharmacoepidemiologic research.This article provides an interpretation of the control selection methods outlined in the Guide on Methodological Standards in Pharmacoepidemiology in China(2nd edition).According to the 2nd edition,studies are categorized into interventional and non-interventional research.In interventional research,control group options include placebo controls,no-treatment controls,active controls,and dose-response controls.For non-interventional research,the gold standard design is the active comparator new user(ACNU)design.When the ACNU design is not feasible,alternative control group strategies should be selected based on the research objective,data sources,exposure characteristics,and potential confounding.These alternatives may include non-user comparators,prevalent user comparators,self-controlled comparators,and external controls.Finally,this article compares the applicability,strengths,and limitations of various control group types.It aims to provide methodological guidance for the scientific selection of control groups in pharmacoepidemiologic studies and to support the conduct of high-quality research.

This paper briefly introduces the definition, classification and significance of effect modification in epidemiological studies, summarizes the difference between effect modifier and confounders, and analyze the influence as well as the role of effect modification in epidemiological studies and Meta-analysis. In this paper, the possible scenarios of effect modification and related analysis strategy in Meta-analysis are indicated by graphics, aiming to arouse researchers' attention to effect modification. This paper also demonstrates how to identify and deal with effect modification in Meta-analysis through a study case of "Efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes", and shows the analysis process and interpretation of results of subgroup analysis and Meta-regression methods respectively. The advantages and disadvantages of these two methods are summarized to provide reference for the method selection of future research.

This paper briefly introduces the characteristics, research significance, and global reporting status of effect modification in network Meta-analysis, demonstrates the heterogeneity caused by effect modification in network Meta-analysis, and emphasizes the importance of exploring effect modification in network Meta-analysis. This paper also summarizes the normalized description and analysis strategies of effect modification in network Meta-analysis. Finally, by the case of "comparison of efficacy of three new hypoglycemic drugs in reducing body weight in type 2 diabetes patients", this paper demonstrates the realization of subgroup analysis and network Meta-regression in exploring effect modification, summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of the two methods, to provide references for future researchers.

Objective:Differences between randomized controlled trial (RCT) results and real world study (RWS) results may not represent a true efficacy-effectiveness gap because efficacy-effectiveness gap estimates may be biased when RWS and RCT differ significantly in study design or when there is bias in RWS result estimation. Secondly, when there is an efficacy- effectiveness gap, it should not treat every patient the same way but assess the real-world factors influencing the intervention's effectiveness and identify the subgroup likely to achieve the desired effect.Methods:Six databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and VIP) were searched up to 31 st December 2022 with detailed search strategies. A scoping review method was used to integrate and qualitatively describe the included literature inductively. Results:Ten articles were included to discuss how to use the RCT research protocol as a template to develop the corresponding RWS research protocol. Moreover, based on correctly estimating the efficacy-effectiveness gap, evaluate the intervention effect in the patient subgroup to confirm the subgroup that can achieve the expected benefit-risk ratio to bridge the efficacy-effectiveness gap.Conclusion:Using real-world data to simulate key features of randomized controlled clinical trial study design can improve the authenticity and effectiveness of study results and bridge the efficacy-effectiveness gap.

This paper briefly introduces the unique advantages, overall analysis ideas and existing analysis methods of individual patient data Meta-analysis in terms of effect modification. In addition to Meta-regression and subgroup analysis, this paper also introduces the analysis methods based on part of individual patient data integrated with aggregated data and summarizes the current reporting of the above mentioned methods. In addition, the application and results interpretation of the above mentioned methods in individual patient data Meta-analysis are presented in this paper by taking "Effects of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors on SBP in patients with type 2 diabetes" as an example and by introducing their advantages and limitations.

Objective:Randomized controlled trials (RCT) usually have strict implementation criteria. The included subjects' characteristics of the conditions for the intervention implementation are quite different from the actual clinical environment, resulting in discrepancies between the risk-benefit of interventions in actual clinical use and the risk-benefit shown in RCT. Therefore, some methods are needed to enhance the extrapolation of RCT results to evaluate the real effects of drugs in real people and clinical practice settings.Methods:Six databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang Data, and VIP) were searched up to 31 st December 2022 with detailed search strategies. A scoping review method was used to integrate and qualitatively describe the included literature inductively. Results:A total of 12 articles were included. Three methods in the included literature focused on: ①improving the design of traditional RCT to increase population representation; ②combining RCT Data with real-world data (RWD) for analysis;③calibrating RCT results according to real-world patient characteristics.Conclusions:Improving the design of RCT to enhance the population representation can improve the extrapolation of the results of RCT. Combining RCT data with RWD can give full play to the advantages of data from different sources; the results of the RCT were calibrated against real-world population characteristics so that the effects of interventions in real-world patient populations can be predicted.

This paper introduces the conducting systematic reviews and Meta-analyses of observational studies of etiology (COSMOS-E) and illustrates the critical issues of COSMOS-E with a published systematic review. This document provides researchers with guidance on all steps in systematic reviews of observational studies of etiology, from shaping the research question, defining exposure and outcomes, to assessing the risk of bias and statistical analysis.