Application of causal inference methods in individual-participant data meta-analyses in medicine: addressing data handling and reporting gaps with new proposed reporting guidelines.

Observational data provide invaluable real-world information in medicine, but certain methodological considerations are required to derive causal estimates. In this systematic review, we evaluated the methodology and reporting quality of individual-level patient data meta-analyses (IPD-MAs) conducted with non-randomized exposures, published in 2009, 2014, and 2019 that sought to estimate a causal relationship in medicine. We screened over 16,000 titles and abstracts, reviewed 45 full-text articles out of the 167 deemed potentially eligible, and included 29 into the analysis. Unfortunately, we found that causal methodologies were rarely implemented, and reporting was generally poor across studies. Specifically, only three of the 29 articles used quasi-experimental methods, and no study used G-methods to adjust for time-varying confounding. To address these issues, we propose stronger collaborations between physicians and methodologists to ensure that causal methodologies are properly implemented in IPD-MAs. In addition, we put forward a suggested checklist of reporting guidelines for IPD-MAs that utilize causal methods. This checklist could improve reporting thereby potentially enhancing the quality and trustworthiness of IPD-MAs, which can be considered one of the most valuable sources of evidence for health policy.

Preparatory Encoding of the Fine Scale of Human Spatial Attention.

Our attentional focus is constantly shifting: In one moment, our attention may be intently concentrated on a specific spot, whereas in another moment we might spread our attention more broadly. Although much is known about the mechanisms by which we shift our visual attention from place to place, relatively little is known about how we shift the aperture of attention from more narrowly to more broadly focused. Here we introduce a novel attentional distribution task to examine the neural mechanisms underlying this process. In this task, participants are presented with an informative cue that indicates the location of an upcoming target. This cue can be perfectly predictive of the exact target location, or it can indicate-with varying degrees of certainty-approximately where the target might appear. This cue is followed by a preparatory period in which there is nothing on the screen except a central fixation cross. Using scalp EEG, we examined neural activity during this preparatory period. We find that, with decreasing certainty regarding the precise location of the impending target, participant RTs increased whereas target identification accuracy decreased. Additionally, the multivariate pattern of preparatory period visual cortical alpha (8-12 Hz) activity encoded attentional distribution. This alpha encoding was predictive of behavioral accuracy and RT nearly 1 sec later. These results offer insight into the neural mechanisms underlying how we use information to guide our attentional distribution and how that influences behavior.

Bridging Language Barriers in COVID-19 Research: Descriptive Study of AccesoCovid.com's Reach and User Engagement.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the challenge of swiftly disseminating research findings to a global audience. Language barriers further exacerbated disparities in access to timely scientific information, particularly for non-English speaking communities. The majority of COVID-19 research was published in English, limiting accessibility for Spanish-speaking populations. OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to assess the reach and effectiveness of AccesoCovid.com, a platform designed to disseminate up-to-date COVID-19 research in both English and Spanish, addressing the language gap in scientific communication. METHODS: AccesoCovid.com was developed through a partnership between the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) and Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM). The website's performance and user engagement were evaluated using Google Analytics over a span of 2 years. Key metrics included user language preference, geographical distribution, and site traffic. The website summarized and translated 1032 articles on various COVID-19 topics, such as "Pharmaceutical Interventions and Vaccines." RESULTS: From February 2021 to February 2023, the platform attracted 57,000 users. Of the 43,000 unique new visitors, 84.2% (n=36,219) hailed from Spanish-speaking regions. The majority accessed the site organically through search engines, with 88.4% (n=38,000) of users arriving this way, while 5000 (11.6%) users accessed the site directly. Most users (n=30,894, 72.1%) preferred the Spanish version of the site. The website's most accessed category was "Pharmaceutical Interventions and Vaccines," followed by "Clinical Presentation and Management" and "Mental Health." Regarding language distribution, 72.1% (n=30,894) of users primarily used Spanish; 21.4% (n=9215) used English; and 6.7% (n=2891) spoke other languages, including Portuguese, Chinese, and German. Geographically, the website attracted visitors from 179 countries, with the highest visitor counts from Mexico (n=12,342, 28.7%), Spain (n=6405, 14.9%), the United States (n=4416, 10.3%), and Peru (n=3821, 8.9%). CONCLUSIONS: AccesoCovid.com successfully bridged a critical language gap in the dissemination of COVID-19 research. Its success underscores the pressing need for multilingual scientific resources. The platform demonstrated significant user engagement and reach, particularly in Spanish-speaking countries. This highlights the potential for similar platforms to ensure equitable access to scientific knowledge across diverse linguistic communities. Future efforts should focus on expanding to other languages and conducting formal evaluations to enhance user satisfaction and impact.

Application of Causal Inference Methods to Pooled Longitudinal Non- Randomized Studies: A Methodological Systematic Review.

Observational data provide invaluable real-world information in medicine, but certain methodological considerations are required to derive causal estimates. In this systematic review, we evaluated the methodology and reporting quality of individual-level patient data meta-analyses (IPD-MAs) published in 2009, 2014, and 2019 that sought to estimate a causal relationship in medicine. We screened over 16,000 titles and abstracts, reviewed 45 full-text articles out of the 167 deemed potentially eligible, and included 29 into the analysis. Unfortunately, we found that causal methodologies were rarely implemented, and reporting was generally poor across studies. Specifically, only three of the 29 articles used quasi-experimental methods, and no study used G-methods to adjust for time-varying confounding. To address these issues, we propose stronger collaborations between physicians and methodologists to ensure that causal methodologies are properly implemented in IPD-MAs. In addition, we put forward a suggested checklist of reporting guidelines for IPD-MAs that utilize causal methods. This checklist could improve reporting thereby potentially enhancing the quality and trustworthiness of IPD-MAs, which can be considered one of the most valuable sources of evidence for health policy.

CD4 T cell-activating neoantigens enhance personalized cancer vaccine efficacy.

Personalized cancer vaccines aim to activate and expand cytotoxic antitumor CD8+ T cells to recognize and kill tumor cells. However, the role of CD4+ T cell activation in the clinical benefit of these vaccines is not well defined. We previously established a personalized neoantigen vaccine (PancVAX) for the pancreatic cancer cell line Panc02, which activates tumor-specific CD8+ T cells but required combinatorial checkpoint modulators to achieve therapeutic efficacy. To determine the effects of neoantigen-specific CD4+ T cell activation, we generated a vaccine (PancVAX2) targeting both major histocompatibility complex class I- (MHCI-) and MHCII-specific neoantigens. Tumor-bearing mice vaccinated with PancVAX2 had significantly improved control of tumor growth and long-term survival benefit without concurrent administration of checkpoint inhibitors. PancVAX2 significantly enhanced priming and recruitment of neoantigen-specific CD8+ T cells into the tumor with lower PD-1 expression after reactivation compared with the CD8+ vaccine alone. Vaccine-induced neoantigen-specific Th1 CD4+ T cells in the tumor were associated with decreased Tregs. Consistent with this, PancVAX2 was associated with more proimmune myeloid-derived suppressor cells and M1-like macrophages in the tumor, demonstrating a less immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. This study demonstrates the biological importance of prioritizing and including CD4+ T cell-specific neoantigens for personalized cancer vaccine modalities.

Systematic Review Reveals Lack of Causal Methodology Applied to Pooled Longitudinal Observational Infectious Disease Studies.

OBJECTIVES: Among ID studies seeking to make causal inferences and pooling individual-level longitudinal data from multiple infectious disease cohorts, we sought to assess what methods are being used, how those methods are being reported, and whether these factors have changed over time. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review of longitudinal observational infectious disease studies pooling individual-level patient data from 2+ studies published in English in 2009, 2014, or 2019. This systematic review protocol is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020204104). RESULTS: Our search yielded 1,462 unique articles. Of these, 16 were included in the final review. Our analysis showed a lack of causal inference methods and of clear reporting on methods and the required assumptions. CONCLUSION: There are many approaches to causal inference which may help facilitate accurate inference in the presence of unmeasured and time-varying confounding. In observational ID studies leveraging pooled, longitudinal IPD, the absence of these causal inference methods and gaps in the reporting of key methodological considerations suggests there is ample opportunity to enhance the rigor and reporting of research in this field. Interdisciplinary collaborations between substantive and methodological experts would strengthen future work.

Current trends in the application of causal inference methods to pooled longitudinal observational infectious disease studies-A protocol for a methodological systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Pooling (or combining) and analysing observational, longitudinal data at the individual level facilitates inference through increased sample sizes, allowing for joint estimation of study- and individual-level exposure variables, and better enabling the assessment of rare exposures and diseases. Empirical studies leveraging such methods when randomization is unethical or impractical have grown in the health sciences in recent years. The adoption of so-called "causal" methods to account for both/either measured and/or unmeasured confounders is an important addition to the methodological toolkit for understanding the distribution, progression, and consequences of infectious diseases (IDs) and interventions on IDs. In the face of the Covid-19 pandemic and in the absence of systematic randomization of exposures or interventions, the value of these methods is even more apparent. Yet to our knowledge, no studies have assessed how causal methods involving pooling individual-level, observational, longitudinal data are being applied in ID-related research. In this systematic review, we assess how these methods are used and reported in ID-related research over the last 10 years. Findings will facilitate evaluation of trends of causal methods for ID research and lead to concrete recommendations for how to apply these methods where gaps in methodological rigor are identified. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will apply MeSH and text terms to identify relevant studies from EBSCO (Academic Search Complete, Business Source Premier, CINAHL, EconLit with Full Text, PsychINFO), EMBASE, PubMed, and Web of Science. Eligible studies are those that apply causal methods to account for confounding when assessing the effects of an intervention or exposure on an ID-related outcome using pooled, individual-level data from 2 or more longitudinal, observational studies. Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles, will be independently screened by two reviewers using Covidence software. Discrepancies will be resolved by a third reviewer. This systematic review protocol has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020204104).

Current trends in the application of causal inference methods to pooled longitudinal non-randomised data: a protocol for a methodological systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Causal methods have been adopted and adapted across health disciplines, particularly for the analysis of single studies. However, the sample sizes necessary to best inform decision-making are often not attainable with single studies, making pooled individual-level data analysis invaluable for public health efforts. Researchers commonly implement causal methods prevailing in their home disciplines, and how these are selected, evaluated, implemented and reported may vary widely. To our knowledge, no article has yet evaluated trends in the implementation and reporting of causal methods in studies leveraging individual-level data pooled from several studies. We undertake this review to uncover patterns in the implementation and reporting of causal methods used across disciplines in research focused on health outcomes. We will investigate variations in methods to infer causality used across disciplines, time and geography and identify gaps in reporting of methods to inform the development of reporting standards and the conversation required to effect change. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will search four databases (EBSCO, Embase, PubMed, Web of Science) using a search strategy developed with librarians from three universities (Heidelberg University, Harvard University, and University of California, San Francisco). The search strategy includes terms such as 'pool*', 'harmoniz*', 'cohort*', 'observational', variations on 'individual-level data'. Four reviewers will independently screen articles using Covidence and extract data from included articles. The extracted data will be analysed descriptively in tables and graphically to reveal the pattern in methods implementation and reporting. This protocol has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42020143148). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical approval was required as only publicly available data were used. The results will be submitted as a manuscript to a peer-reviewed journal, disseminated in conferences if relevant, and published as part of doctoral dissertations in Global Health at the Heidelberg University Hospital.