Literature DB >> 12485553

Intention-to-treat analysis: who is in? Who is out?

Robin L Kruse1, Brian S Alper, Carin Reust, James J Stevermer, Scott Shannon, Randy H Williams.   

Abstract

To assess whether the term "intention to treat" (ITT) predicts inclusion of all randomized subjects in the analysis, we reviewed 100 randomly selected reports of randomized trials that mentioned analysis by ITT. Only 42 of 100 reports included all randomized subjects in the ITT analysis. We could not determine which categories of participants were excluded from the ITT analysis in 13 trials. The most common categories of excluded subjects were patients who, after randomization, received no follow-up (16/100), received no treatment (14/100), or were found not to meet study entry criteria (12/100). We could determine the number of participants in the ITT analysis for 92 studies. Nineteen of the 92 studies excluded more than 5% of randomized participants, and 10 excluded more than 10%. There is considerable variation in how researchers define and apply the principle of intention to treat.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12485553

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Fam Pract        ISSN: 0094-3509            Impact factor:   0.493


  20 in total

1.  CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials.

Authors:  David Moher; Sally Hopewell; Kenneth F Schulz; Victor Montori; Peter C Gøtzsche; P J Devereaux; Diana Elbourne; Matthias Egger; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-23

2.  Alternative approaches to assessing intervention effectiveness in randomized trials: application in a colorectal cancer screening study.

Authors:  Annette E Maxwell; Catherine M Crespi; Leda L Danao; Cynthia Antonio; Gabriel M Garcia; Roshan Bastani
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2011-06-16       Impact factor: 2.506

3.  Modified intention to treat reporting in randomised controlled trials: systematic review.

Authors:  Iosief Abraha; Alessandro Montedori
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-06-14

4.  The quality of reports of randomised trials in 2000 and 2006: comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed.

Authors:  Sally Hopewell; Susan Dutton; Ly-Mee Yu; An-Wen Chan; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-03-23

Review 5.  Nonadherence to treatment protocol in published randomised controlled trials: a review.

Authors:  Susanna Dodd; Ian R White; Paula Williamson
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2012-06-18       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 6.  Inconsistent definitions for intention-to-treat in relation to missing outcome data: systematic review of the methods literature.

Authors:  Mohamad Alshurafa; Matthias Briel; Elie A Akl; Ted Haines; Paul Moayyedi; Stephen J Gentles; Lorena Rios; Chau Tran; Neera Bhatnagar; Francois Lamontagne; Stephen D Walter; Gordon H Guyatt
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-11-15       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Modified versus standard intention-to-treat reporting: are there differences in methodological quality, sponsorship, and findings in randomized trials? A cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Alessandro Montedori; Maria Isabella Bonacini; Giovanni Casazza; Maria Laura Luchetta; Piergiorgio Duca; Francesco Cozzolino; Iosief Abraha
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2011-02-28       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Intention-to-treat concept: A review.

Authors:  Sandeep K Gupta
Journal:  Perspect Clin Res       Date:  2011-07

9.  Tailored, iterative, printed dietary feedback is as effective as group education in improving dietary behaviours: results from a randomised control trial in middle-aged adults with cardiovascular risk factors.

Authors:  Janine L Wright; Jillian L Sherriff; Satvinder S Dhaliwal; John C L Mamo
Journal:  Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act       Date:  2011-05-20       Impact factor: 6.457

10.  Differences in reporting of analyses in internal company documents versus published trial reports: comparisons in industry-sponsored trials in off-label uses of gabapentin.

Authors:  S Swaroop Vedula; Tianjing Li; Kay Dickersin
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2013-01-29       Impact factor: 11.069

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.