So, stratification does not need other data, but the multivariate adjustment model uses external data. What external data is used? I mean, does it have to be an RCT meta-analysis with a dose-response curve, or can it be non-randomized/without a dose-response curve?
Any study comparing groups with respect to the same exposure and outcome is OK. And both stratification and multivariable adjustment are rooted in real-world data; however, the regression component of multivariable adjustment is using real-world data to create artificial data (i.e. the regression line that does not perfectly go through every real-world data point, unless R=1 or R=-1). Does that answer your question?
Yes, I think it mostly does. If I got it right, it does not need a dose-response curve and neither does it need to be an RCT (I remembered that we don't even have RCTs on smoking and it’s adjustable, so I could have figured).
But what do you mean by rooted in real-world data?
Just that the results are reflective of reality and non-fictional?
All I mean is that the regression line is based on real-world data points measured in the study (e.g. how much someone's LDL-C changed in response to changing their saturated fat intake). I only point this out because some people criticise the regression line for being "fake/artificial" as if it's just been pulled from thin air, rather than based on what was observed.
So, stratification does not need other data, but the multivariate adjustment model uses external data. What external data is used? I mean, does it have to be an RCT meta-analysis with a dose-response curve, or can it be non-randomized/without a dose-response curve?
Any study comparing groups with respect to the same exposure and outcome is OK. And both stratification and multivariable adjustment are rooted in real-world data; however, the regression component of multivariable adjustment is using real-world data to create artificial data (i.e. the regression line that does not perfectly go through every real-world data point, unless R=1 or R=-1). Does that answer your question?
Yes, I think it mostly does. If I got it right, it does not need a dose-response curve and neither does it need to be an RCT (I remembered that we don't even have RCTs on smoking and it’s adjustable, so I could have figured).
But what do you mean by rooted in real-world data?
Just that the results are reflective of reality and non-fictional?
All I mean is that the regression line is based on real-world data points measured in the study (e.g. how much someone's LDL-C changed in response to changing their saturated fat intake). I only point this out because some people criticise the regression line for being "fake/artificial" as if it's just been pulled from thin air, rather than based on what was observed.