Literature DB >> 12483769

A graphical sensitivity analysis for clinical trials with non-ignorable missing binary outcome.

Sally Hollis1.   

Abstract

Many clinical trials are analysed using an intention-to-treat (ITT) approach. A full application of the ITT approach is only possible when complete outcome data are available for all randomized subjects. In a recent survey of clinical trial reports including an ITT analysis, complete case analysis (excluding all patients with a missing response) was common. This does not comply with the basic principles of ITT since not all randomized subjects are included in the analysis. Analyses of data with missing values are based on untestable assumptions, and so sensitivity analysis presenting a range of estimates under alternative assumptions about the missing-data mechanism is recommended. For binary outcome, extreme case analysis has been suggested as a simple form of sensitivity analysis, but this is rarely conclusive. A graphical sensitivity analysis is proposed which displays the results of all possible allocations of cases with missing binary outcome. Extension to allow binomial variation in outcome is also considered. The display is based on easily interpretable parameters and allows informal examination of the effects of varying prior beliefs. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12483769     DOI: 10.1002/sim.1276

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  19 in total

1.  Profile Likelihood and Incomplete Data.

Authors:  Zhiwei Zhang
Journal:  Int Stat Rev       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 2.217

2.  Missing data: a special challenge in aging research.

Authors:  Susan E Hardy; Heather Allore; Stephanie A Studenski
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2009-02-10       Impact factor: 5.562

3.  Transfusion of plasma, platelets, and red blood cells in a 1:1:1 vs a 1:1:2 ratio and mortality in patients with severe trauma: the PROPPR randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  John B Holcomb; Barbara C Tilley; Sarah Baraniuk; Erin E Fox; Charles E Wade; Jeanette M Podbielski; Deborah J del Junco; Karen J Brasel; Eileen M Bulger; Rachael A Callcut; Mitchell Jay Cohen; Bryan A Cotton; Timothy C Fabian; Kenji Inaba; Jeffrey D Kerby; Peter Muskat; Terence O'Keeffe; Sandro Rizoli; Bryce R H Robinson; Thomas M Scalea; Martin A Schreiber; Deborah M Stein; Jordan A Weinberg; Jeannie L Callum; John R Hess; Nena Matijevic; Christopher N Miller; Jean-Francois Pittet; David B Hoyt; Gail D Pearson; Brian Leroux; Gerald van Belle
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2015-02-03       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Reconciliation of Type 2 Diabetes Remission Rates in Studies of Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass.

Authors:  Deanna J M Isaman; Amy E Rothberg; William H Herman
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2016-10-13       Impact factor: 19.112

5.  Sensitivity analysis for a partially missing binary outcome in a two-arm randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Victoria Liublinska; Donald B Rubin
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2014-05-20       Impact factor: 2.373

6.  Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for acute domestic carbon monoxide poisoning: two randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Djillali Annane; Karim Chadda; Philippe Gajdos; Marie-Claude Jars-Guincestre; Sylvie Chevret; Jean-Claude Raphael
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2010-12-02       Impact factor: 17.440

7.  A double-blind randomized controlled trial of N-acetylcysteine in cannabis-dependent adolescents.

Authors:  Kevin M Gray; Matthew J Carpenter; Nathaniel L Baker; Stacia M DeSantis; Elisabeth Kryway; Karen J Hartwell; Aimee L McRae-Clark; Kathleen T Brady
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 18.112

8.  Maximum likelihood estimation with missing outcomes: From simplicity to complexity.

Authors:  Stuart G Baker
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2019-08-08       Impact factor: 2.373

9.  Including all individuals is not enough: lessons for intention-to-treat analysis.

Authors:  Ian R White; James Carpenter; Nicholas J Horton
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2012-07-02       Impact factor: 2.486

10.  Imputation methods for missing outcome data in meta-analysis of clinical trials.

Authors:  Julian P T Higgins; Ian R White; Angela M Wood
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.486

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.