Evaluating the Evidence: Statistical Methods in Randomized Controlled Trials in the Urological Literature

Journal of Urology

Volumn 180, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 1463-1467

  Scales Jr , Charles D ^a   Norris, Regina D ^a   Preminger, Glenn M ^a   Vieweg, Johannes ^b   Peterson, Bercedis L ^a   Dahm, Philipp ^b  

^a DUKE UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

randomized controlled trials as topic; statistics as topic; urology

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOSTATISTICS; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; EVALUATION; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; SAMPLE SIZE; SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE; STANDARD; STATISTICAL CONCEPTS; UROLOGY;

EVALUATION STUDIES AS TOPIC; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PUBLICATIONS; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; STATISTICS AS TOPIC; UROLOGY;

EID: 50949118901     PISSN: 00225347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.juro.2008.06.026     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Sackett D.L., Rosenberg W.M., Gray J.A., Haynes R.B., and Richardson W.S. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 312 (1996) 71
2. Scales Jr. C.D., Preminger G.M., Keitz S.A., and Dahm P. Evidence based clinical practice: a primer for urologists. J Urol 178 (2007) 775
3. Begg C., Cho M., Eastwood S., Horton R., Moher D., Olkin I., et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA 276 (1996) 637
4. Moher D., Schulz K.F., and Altman D.G. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet 357 (2001) 1191
5. Schulz K.F., Chalmers I., Hayes R.J., and Altman D.G. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 273 (1995) 408
6. Balk E.M., Bonis P.A., Moskowitz H., Schmid C.H., Ioannidis J.P., Wang C., et al. Correlation of quality measures with estimates of treatment effect in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 287 (2002) 2973
7. Hutton J.L., and Williamson P.R. Bias in meta-analysis due to outcome variable selection within studies. Appl Stat 49 (2000) 359
8. Gotzsche P.C. Methodology and overt and hidden bias in reports of 196 double-blind trials of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in rheumatoid arthritis. Control Clin Trials 10 (1989) 31
9. Ruiz-Canela M., Martinez-Gonzalez M.A., and de Irala-Estevez J. Intention to treat analysis is related to methodological quality. BMJ 320 (2000) 1007
10. Hollis S., and Campbell F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis?. Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ 319 (1999) 670
11. Hall J.C., Mills B., Nguyen H., and Hall J.L. Methodologic standards in surgical trials. Surgery 119 (1996) 466
12. Assmann S.F., Pocock S.J., Enos L.E., and Kasten L.E. Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials. Lancet 355 (2000) 1064
13. Scales Jr. C.D., Norris R.D., Peterson B.L., Preminger G.M., and Dahm P. Clinical research and statistical methods in the urology literature. J Urol 174 (2005) 1374
14. Breau R.H., Carnat T.A., and Gaboury I. Inadequate statistical power of negative clinical trials in urological literature. J Urol 176 (2006) 263
15. Welk B., Afshar K., and MacNeily A.E. Randomized controlled trials in pediatric urology: room for improvement. J Urol 176 (2006) 306
16. Scales Jr. C.D., Norris R.D., Keitz S.A., Peterson B.L., Preminger G.M., Vieweg J., et al. A critical assessment of the quality of reporting of randomized, controlled trials in the urology literature. J Urol 177 (2007) 1090
17. Altman D.G., Schulz K.F., Moher D., Egger M., Davidoff F., Elbourne D., et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 134 (2001) 663
18. Moher D., Dulberg C.S., and Wells G.A. Statistical power, sample size, and their reporting in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 272 (1994) 122
19. Lachin J.L. Statistical considerations in the intent-to-treat principle. Control Clin Trials 21 (2000) 526
20. Chan A.W., Hrobjartsson A., Haahr M.T., Gotzsche P.C., and Altman D.G. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 291 (2004) 2457