METHODS: We used a transcultural dataset from seven countries (Australia, Hungary, Malaysia, Romania, Singapore, Spain, and the United Kingdom) with participating parents/carers reporting on the Quality of Life in Autism (QoLA) questionnaire. The QoLA questionnaire is a validated measure of QoL for parents of autistic children, with Part A subscale measuring parental QoL and part B subscale assessing the parental impact of the child's autism spectrum disorder (ASD) symptoms or features. We used the Quade's ranked analysis of covariance to determine significant differences between the countries in relation to QoLA Part A and Part B scores while adjusting for baseline differences using covariates such as parents' gender, child's age, and gender. Additionally, a post-hoc analysis with Bonferroni correction was also conducted to examine multiple pairwise comparisons.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: We found that while the effect of features of ASD (Part B subscale) stayed strongly comparable between cultures, the self-reported parental QoL was most likely determined by different aspects of culture in different countries. It is concluded that while the ASD symptoms or features appear to affect parents in the same way across different countries, the parental QoL may be a culturally informed construct.
METHODS AND RESULTS: Individual patient data for 16 922 patients from five randomized clinical trials and 46 914 patients from two HF registries were included. The registry patients were categorized into trial-eligible and non-eligible groups using the most commonly used inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of 26 104 (56%) registry patients fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Unadjusted all-cause mortality rates at 1 year were lowest in the trial population (7%), followed by trial-eligible patients (12%) and trial-non-eligible registry patients (26%). After adjustment for age and sex, all-cause mortality rates were similar between trial participants and trial-eligible registry patients [standardized mortality ratio (SMR) 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.03] but cardiovascular mortality was higher in trial participants (SMR 1.19; 1.12-1.27). After full case-mix adjustment, the SMR for cardiovascular mortality remained higher in the trials at 1.28 (1.20-1.37) compared to RCT-eligible registry patients.
CONCLUSION: In contemporary HF registries, over half of HFrEF patients would have been eligible for trial enrolment. Crude clinical event rates were lower in the trials, but, after adjustment for case-mix, trial participants had similar rates of survival as registries. Despite this, they had about 30% higher cardiovascular mortality rates. Age and sex were the main drivers of differences in clinical outcomes between HF trials and observational HF registries.