Intention-to-treat approach to data from randomized controlled trials: A sensitivity analysis

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 56, Issue 9, 2003, Pages 833-842

  Wright, C C ^a   Sim, J ^b  

^a Institute for Clean Growth and Future Mobility   (United Kingdom)

^b KEELE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Imputation; Intention to treat analysis; Randomized controlled trials; Sensitivity analysis

Indexed keywords

ANALGESIC AGENT; ANTIINFLAMMATORY AGENT;

ANALYTIC METHOD; ARTICLE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; EVALUATION; FOLLOW UP; HIP DISEASE; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; METHODOLOGY; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT SELECTION; PHYSIOTHERAPY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; STANDARD; THEORETICAL MODEL; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0141849400     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00155-0     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Lee Y.J., Ellenberg J.H., Hirtz D.G., et al. Analysis of clinical trials by treatment actually received: is it really an option? Stat Med. 10:1991;1595-1605.
2. Newell D.J. Intention-to-treat analysis: implications for quantitative and qualitative research. Int J Epidemiol. 21:1992;837-841.
3. Gibaldi M., Sullivan S. Intention-to-treat analysis in randomized trials: who gets counted? J Clin Pharmacol. 37:1997;667-672.
4. Murray G.D., Findlay J.G. Correcting for the bias caused by drop-outs in hypertension trials. Stat Med. 7:1988;941-946.
5. Peduzzi P., Detre K., Wittes J., et al. Intent-to-treat analysis and the problem of crossovers. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 101:1991;481-487.
6. Heitjan D.F. Causal inference in a clinical trial: a comparative example. Control Clin Trials. 20:1999;309-318.
7. Hollis S., Campbell F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 319:1999;670-674.
8. Ruiz-Canela M., Martínez-González M.A., de Irala-Estévz J. Intention to treat analysis is related to methodological quality. BMJ. 320:2000;1007.
9. Roland M., Torgerson D.J. Understanding controlled trials: what are pragmatic trials? BMJ. 316:1998;285.
10. van der Linden S., Bouter L., Tugwell P. What are the minimal methodological requirements for a good trial? I. The clinician's view . Schlapbach P., Gerber N.J. Physiotherapy: controlled trials and facts. 1991;1-8 Karger, Basel.
11. Schwartz D., Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutic trials. J Chronic Dis. 20:1967;637-648.
12. Fisher L.D., Dixon D.O., Herson J., et al. Intention to treat in clinical trials. Pearce K.E. Statistical issues in drug research and development. 1990;331-350 Marcel Dekker, New York.
13. Armitage P., Berry G., Matthews J.N.S. Statistical methods in medical research. 4th ed. 2002;Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.
14. Altman D.G. Practical statistics for medical research. 1991;Chapman & Hall, London.
15. Sim J., Wright C. Research in health care: concepts, designs and methods. 2000;Stanley Thornes, Cheltenham (UK).
16. Rubin D.B. Inference and missing data. Biometrika. 63:1976;581-592.
17. Lewis J.A. Statistical standards for protocols and protocol deviations. Recent Results Cancer Res. 111:1988;27-33.
18. Gould A.L. A new approach to the analysis of clinical drug trials with withdrawals. Biometrics. 36:1980;721-727.
19. Everitt B.S. Statistical methods for medical investigations. 2nd ed. 1994;Edward Arnold, London.
20. Heyting A., Tolboom J.T.B.M., Essers J.G.A. Statistical handling of drop-outs in longitudinal clinical trials. Stat Med. 11:1992;2043-2061.
21. Little R.J.A., Rubin D.B. Statistical analysis of data with missing values. 1987;Wiley, New York.
22. Lewis J.A., Machin D. Intention to treat: who should use it? Br J Cancer. 68:1993;647-650.
23. Miller M.E., Morgan T.M., Epseland M.A., et al. Group comparisons involving missing data in clinical trials: a comparison of estimates and power (size) for some simple approaches. Stat Med. 20:2001;2383-2397.
24. Little R., Yau L. Intent-to-treat analysis for longitudinal studies with drop-outs. Biometrics. 52:1996;1324-1333.
25. van Tulder M.W., Assendelft W.J.J., Koes B.W., et al. Method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane Collaboration Back Review Group for spinal disorders. Spine. 22:1997;2323-2330.
26. Staquet M.J., Hays R.D., Fayers P.M. Quality of life assessment in clinical trials. 1998;Oxford University Press, Oxford.
27. Tabachnick B.G., Fidell L.S. Using multivariate statistics. 4th ed. 2001;Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
28. Senn S. Cross-over trials in clinical research. 1993;John Wiley, Chichester.
29. Montgomery D.C. Design and analysis of experiments. 5th ed. 2001;Wiley, New York.
30. Sheiner L.B., Rubin D.B. Intention-to-treat analysis and the goals of clinical trials. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 57:1994;6-15.
31. Chêne G., Morlat P., Leport C., et al. Intention-to-treat vs. on-treatment analyses of clinical trial data: experience from a study of pyrimethamine in the primary prophylaxis of toxoplasmosis in HIV-infected patients. Control Clin Trials. 19:1998;233-248.
32. Lachin J.M. Statistical considerations in the intent-to-treat principle. Control Clin Trials. 21:2000;167-189.
33. Gillings D., Koch G. The application of the principle of intention-to-treat to the analysis of clinical trials. Drug Inf J. 25:1991;411-424.
34. Little R.J.A., Rubin D.B. The analysis of social science data with missing values. Sociol Methods Res. 18:1990;292-326.
35. Huisman M. Imputation of missing item responses: some simple techniques. Qual Quantity. 34:2000;331-351.
36. Allison P.D. Missing data. 2002;Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks (CA).
37. Begg C.B. Ruminations on the intent-to-treat principle. Control Clin Trials. 21:2000;241-243.
38. Schulz K.F., Grimes D.A. Sample size slippages in randomized trials: exclusions and the lost and wayward. Lancet. 359:2002;781-785.