Literature DB >> 17573981

Discordance between reported intention-to-treat and per protocol analyses.

Núria Porta1, Catalina Bonet, Erik Cobo.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the degree of disagreement between the two most popular methods for dealing with missing data: intention to treat (ITT) and per protocol (PP). STUDY DESIGN AND
SETTING: We performed a systematic review of randomized two-armed clinical trials (CTs) published between 2001 and 2003, abstracted in PubMed and reporting both the ITT and PP analyses on a primary binary endpoint, out of which 74 papers were finally selected. The treatment effect of each CT was measured by the odds ratio, and the disagreement between them was quantified by the Bland-Altman method.
RESULTS: On average, the PP estimator provides greater values Log(e)ORPP=1 x 25.Log(e)ORITT, (95% CI: 1.15, 1.35) than the corresponding ITT estimator, although the limits of concordance showed that the ratio between the two estimators varies greatly from 0.39 up to 2.53.
CONCLUSION: These results confirm that missing values may cause both systematic and unpredictable bias in CTs. Further efforts should be made to minimize protocol deviations and to use better statistical methods to highlight the drawbacks of missing information. In the presence of protocol deviations, the conclusion of a CT cannot rest on the single reporting of either the ITT or the PP approach alone.

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17573981     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.09.013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  54 in total

1.  Intention-to-treat analyses in behavioral medicine randomized clinical trials.

Authors:  Sherry L Pagoto; Andrea T Kozak; Priya John; Jamie S Bodenlos; Donald Hedeker; Bonnie Spring; Kristin L Schneider
Journal:  Int J Behav Med       Date:  2009

2.  Withdrawing from the treatment does not mean from the study.

Authors:  Erik Cobo; Senn Stephen; Matthew Elmore
Journal:  Bull World Health Organ       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 9.408

3.  Effectiveness of polydeoxyribonucleotide injection versus normal saline injection for treatment of chronic plantar fasciitis: a prospective randomised clinical trial.

Authors:  Jae Kwang Kim; Jae Yoon Chung
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-04-29       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Heavy Drinking among Women Receiving Intensive Motivational Interviewing: 6-Month Outcomes.

Authors:  Douglas L Polcin; Madhabika B Nayak; Rachael Korcha; Sheila Pugh; Jane Witbrodt; Michelle Salinardi; Gantt Galloway; Emily Nelson
Journal:  J Psychoactive Drugs       Date:  2019-07-21

5.  A cluster randomised trial of a telephone-based intervention for parents to increase fruit and vegetable consumption in their 3- to 5-year-old children: study protocol.

Authors:  Rebecca J Wyse; Luke Wolfenden; Elizabeth Campbell; Leah Brennan; Karen J Campbell; Amanda Fletcher; Jenny Bowman; Todd R Heard; John Wiggers
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2010-04-28       Impact factor: 3.295

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

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

7.  Virgin olive oil supplementation and long-term cognition: the PREDIMED-NAVARRA randomized, trial.

Authors:  E H Martínez-Lapiscina; P Clavero; E Toledo; B San Julián; A Sanchez-Tainta; D Corella; R M Lamuela-Raventós; J A Martínez; M Á Martínez-Gonzalez
Journal:  J Nutr Health Aging       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 4.075

Review 8.  Meta-analysis of probiotics for the treatment of irritable bowel syndrome.

Authors:  Lynne V McFarland; Sascha Dublin
Journal:  World J Gastroenterol       Date:  2008-05-07       Impact factor: 5.742

9.  Risk of bias versus quality assessment of randomised controlled trials: cross sectional study.

Authors:  Lisa Hartling; Maria Ospina; Yuanyuan Liang; Donna M Dryden; Nicola Hooton; Jennifer Krebs Seida; Terry P Klassen
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2009-10-19

10.  Association of trial registration with the results and conclusions of published trials of new oncology drugs.

Authors:  Nicolas Rasmussen; Kirby Lee; Lisa Bero
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2009-12-16       Impact factor: 2.279

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.