Post-randomisation exclusions: The intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis

British Medical Journal

Volumn 325, Issue 7365, 2002, Pages 652-654

  Fergusson, Dean ^a   Aaron, Shawn D ^a   Guyatt, Gordon ^b   Hébert, Paul ^a  

^a OTTAWA HOSPITAL RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^b MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; DATA ANALYSIS; HUMAN; PATIENT CARE; PATIENT INFORMATION; PATIENT SELECTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZATION; REVIEW; BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH;

DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; HUMANS; PATIENT SELECTION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS;

EID: 0037151796     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.325.7365.652     Document Type: Review

References (16)

1. Schwartz D, Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J Chronic Dis 1967;20:637-48.
2. Newell DJ. Intention-to-treat analysis: implications for quantitative and qualitative research. Int J Epidemiol 1992;21:837-41.
3. Peto R, Pike MC, Armitage P, Breslow NE, Cox DR, Howard SV, et al. Design and analysis of randomized clinical trials requiring prolonged observation of each patient. I. Introduction and design. Br J Cancer 1976;34:585-612.
4. Lee YJ, Ellenberg JH, Hirtz DG, Nelson KB. Analysis of clinical trials by treatment actually received: is it really an option? Stat Med 1991;10:1595-605.
5. Hollis S, Campbell F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ 1999;319:670-4.
6. Sommer A, Zeger SL. On estimating efficacy from clinical trials. Stat Med 1991;10:45-52.
7. Rubin DB. More powerful randomization-based p-values in double-blind trials with non-compliance. Stat Med 1998;17:371-85.
8. Pocock SJ, Abdalla M. The hope and the hazards of using compliance data in randomized controlled trials. Stat Med 1998;17:303-17.
9. Gent M, Sackett DL. The qualification and disqualification of patients and events in long-term cardiovascular clinical trials. Thromb Haemost 1979;41:123-34.
10. Stiell IG, Hebert PC, Wells GA, Vandemheen KL, Tang AS, Higginson LA, et al. Vasopressin versus epinephrine for inhospital cardiac arrest: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2001;358:105.
11. Bone RC, Balk RA, Cerra FB, Dellinger RP, Fein AM, Knaus WA, et al. Definitions for sepsis and organ failure and guidelines for the use of innovative therapies in sepsis. The ACCP/SCCM Consensus Conference Committee. American College of Chest Physicians/Society of Critical Care Medicine. Chest 1992;101:1644-55.
12. Guyatt GH, Bernard GR, Calandra T, Cook DJ, Elbourne D, Marshall J, et al, for a UK Medical Research Council International Working Party. New strategies for clinical trials in patients with sepsis and septic shock. Crit Care Med 2001;29:880-6.
13. Fisher CJ Jr, Dhalnaut JF, Opal SM, Pribble JP, Balk RA, Slotman GJ, et al. Recombinant human interleukin 1 receptor antagonist in the treatment of patients with sepsis syndrome. Results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Phase III rhIL-Ira Sepsis Syndrome Study Group. JAMA 1994;271:1836-43.
14. Treanor IJ, Hayen FG, Vrooman PS, Barbarash R, Bettis R, Riff D, et al. Efficacy and safety of the oral neuraminidase inhibitor oseltamivir in treating acute influenza. A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000;283:1016-24.
15. Houbiers JG, Brand A, van de Watering LM, Hermans J, Verwey PJ, Bijnen AB, et al. Randomised controlled trial comparing transfusion of leucocyte-depleted or buffy-coat-depleted blood in surgery for colorectal cancer. Lancet 1994;344:573-8.
16. Loughnan BA, Carli F, Romney M, Dore CJ, Gordon H. Randomized controlled comparison of epidural bupivacaine versus pethidine for analgesia in labour. Br J Anaesth 2000;84:715-9.