Literature DB >> 19164784

Are unadjusted analyses of clinical trials inappropriately biased toward the null?

David M Kent, Thomas A Trikalinos, Michael D Hill.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Mesh：

Year:  2009        PMID： 19164784      PMCID： PMC2693723          DOI： 10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.532051

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stroke        ISSN： 0039-2499            Impact factor:   7.914


× No keyword cloud information.
  11 in total

1.  Covariate adjustment in randomized controlled trials with dichotomous outcomes increases statistical power and reduces sample size requirements.

Authors:  Adrián V Hernández; Ewout W Steyerberg; J Dik F Habbema
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 6.437

2.  Randomized controlled trials with time-to-event outcomes: how much does prespecified covariate adjustment increase power?

Authors:  Adrián V Hernández; Marinus J C Eijkemans; Ewout W Steyerberg
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2005-11-07       Impact factor: 3.797

3.  Adjustment for strong predictors of outcome in traumatic brain injury trials: 25% reduction in sample size requirements in the IMPACT study.

Authors:  Adrián V Hernández; Ewout W Steyerberg; Isabella Butcher; Nino Mushkudiani; Gillian S Taylor; Gordon D Murray; Anthony Marmarou; Sung C Choi; Juan Lu; J Dik F Habbema; Andrew I R Maas
Journal:  J Neurotrauma       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 5.269

4.  Limitations of applying summary results of clinical trials to individual patients: the need for risk stratification.

Authors:  David M Kent; Rodney A Hayward
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2007-09-12       Impact factor: 56.272

5.  Sample size in clinical trials with dichotomous endpoints: use of covariables.

Authors:  S C Choi
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  1998-07       Impact factor: 1.051

6.  The stroke-thrombolytic predictive instrument: a predictive instrument for intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischemic stroke.

Authors:  David M Kent; Harry P Selker; Robin Ruthazer; Erich Bluhmki; Werner Hacke
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2006-10-26       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 7.  Interpretation and choice of effect measures in epidemiologic analyses.

Authors:  S Greenland
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1987-05       Impact factor: 4.897

8.  Clinical trials in acute myocardial infarction: should we adjust for baseline characteristics?

Authors:  E W Steyerberg; P M Bossuyt; K L Lee
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2000-05       Impact factor: 4.749

9.  Risk adjustment effect on stroke clinical trials.

Authors:  Karen C Johnston; Alfred F Connors; Douglas P Wagner; E Clarke Haley
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2004-01-08       Impact factor: 7.914

Review 10.  Future of neuroprotection for acute stroke: in the aftermath of the SAINT trials.

Authors:  Sean I Savitz; Marc Fisher
Journal:  Ann Neurol       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 10.422
View more
  6 in total

1.  Analysis of combined data from heterogeneous study designs: an applied example from the patient navigation research program.

Authors:  Richard G Roetzheim; Karen M Freund; Don K Corle; David M Murray; Frederick R Snyder; Andrea C Kronman; Pascal Jean-Pierre; Peter C Raich; Alan Ec Holden; Julie S Darnell; Victoria Warren-Mears; Steven Patierno
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2012-01-24       Impact factor: 2.486

2.  Over-EXTENDing the Window for Thrombolytic Therapy in Cerebrovascular Accident: September 2019 Annals of Emergency Medicine Journal Club.

Authors:  Rory J Spiegel; John P Donnelly; Ryan P Radecki
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 5.721

Review 3.  Optimal end points for acute stroke therapy trials: best ways to measure treatment effects of drugs and devices.

Authors:  Jeffrey L Saver
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 7.914

4.  Covariate imbalance and adjustment for logistic regression analysis of clinical trial data.

Authors:  Jody D Ciolino; Renée H Martin; Wenle Zhao; Edward C Jauch; Michael D Hill; Yuko Y Palesch
Journal:  J Biopharm Stat       Date:  2013       Impact factor: 1.051

5.  Bias, precision and statistical power of analysis of covariance in the analysis of randomized trials with baseline imbalance: a simulation study.

Authors:  Bolaji E Egbewale; Martyn Lewis; Julius Sim
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 4.615

6.  False Appearance of Gene-Environment Interactions in Genetic Association Studies.

Authors:  Yi-Shan Su; Wen-Chung Lee
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 1.889
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.