Literature DB >> 18706763

Analyzing multiple endpoints in clinical trials of pain treatments: IMMPACT recommendations. Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials.

Dennis C Turk1, Robert H Dworkin, Michael P McDermott, Nicholas Bellamy, Laurie B Burke, Julie M Chandler, Charles S Cleeland, Penney Cowan, Rozalina Dimitrova, John T Farrar, Sharon Hertz, Joseph F Heyse, Smriti Iyengar, Alejandro R Jadad, Gary W Jay, John A Jermano, Nathaniel P Katz, Donald C Manning, Susan Martin, Mitchell B Max, Patrick McGrath, Henry J McQuay, Steve Quessy, Bob A Rappaport, Dennis A Revicki, Margaret Rothman, Joseph W Stauffer, Ola Svensson, Richard E White, James Witter.   

Abstract

The increasing complexity of randomized clinical trials and the practice of obtaining a wide variety of measurements from study participants have made the consideration of multiple endpoints a critically important issue in the design, analysis, and interpretation of clinical trials. Failure to consider important outcomes can limit the validity and utility of clinical trials; specifying multiple endpoints for the evaluation of treatment efficacy, however, can increase the rate of false positive conclusions about the efficacy of a treatment. We describe the use of multiple endpoints in the design, analysis, and interpretation of pain clinical trials, and review available strategies and methods for addressing multiplicity. To decrease the probability of a Type I error (i.e., the likelihood of obtaining statistically significant results by chance) in pain clinical trials, the use of gatekeeping procedures and other methods that correct for multiple analyses is recommended when a single primary endpoint does not adequately reflect the overall benefits of treatment. We emphasize the importance of specifying in advance the outcomes and clinical decision rule that will serve as the basis for determining that a treatment is efficacious and the methods that will be used to control the overall Type I error rate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18706763     DOI: 10.1016/j.pain.2008.06.025

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pain        ISSN: 0304-3959            Impact factor:   6.961


  57 in total

Review 1.  Developing effective cancer pain education programs.

Authors:  Michelle Y Martin; Maria Pisu; Elizabeth A Kvale; Shelley A Johns
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2012-08

2.  Effects of the noncompetitive N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor antagonists ketamine and MK-801 on pain-stimulated and pain-depressed behaviour in rats.

Authors:  T M Hillhouse; S S Negus
Journal:  Eur J Pain       Date:  2016-02-23       Impact factor: 3.931

3.  Computerized progress notes for chronic pain patients receiving opioids; the Prescription Opioid Documentation System (PODS).

Authors:  Barth L Wilsey; Scott M Fishman; Carlos Casamalhuapa; Naileshni Singh
Journal:  Pain Med       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 3.750

4.  The Brief Pain Inventory and its "pain at its worst in the last 24 hours" item: clinical trial endpoint considerations.

Authors:  Thomas M Atkinson; Tito R Mendoza; Laura Sit; Steven Passik; Howard I Scher; Charles Cleeland; Ethan Basch
Journal:  Pain Med       Date:  2010-01-15       Impact factor: 3.750

5.  Single-sweep spectral analysis of contact heat evoked potentials: a novel approach to identify altered cortical processing after morphine treatment.

Authors:  Tine M Hansen; Carina Graversen; Jens B Frøkjaer; Anne E Olesen; Massimiliano Valeriani; Asbjørn M Drewes
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 4.335

6.  Comparative responsiveness of pain measures in cancer patients.

Authors:  Kurt Kroenke; Dale Theobald; Jingwei Wu; Wanzhu Tu; Erin E Krebs
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2012-07-15       Impact factor: 5.820

7.  Determinants of pain treatment response and nonresponse: identification of TMD patient subgroups.

Authors:  Mark D Litt; Felipe B Porto
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2013-10-02       Impact factor: 5.820

8.  Pain questionnaire performance in advanced prostate cancer: comparative results from two international clinical trials.

Authors:  Donald W Robinson; Ning Zhao; Fitzroy Dawkins; Ming Qi; Dennis Revicki
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-04-16       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Does acupuncture improve quality of life for patients with pain associated with the spine? A systematic review.

Authors:  Shao-Chen Lu; Zhen Zheng; Charlie Changli Xue
Journal:  Evid Based Complement Alternat Med       Date:  2010-09-29       Impact factor: 2.629

Review 10.  Local anaesthetic sympathetic blockade for complex regional pain syndrome.

Authors:  Neil E O'Connell; Benedict M Wand; William Gibson; Daniel B Carr; Frank Birklein; Tasha R Stanton
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-07-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.