How to guarantee finding a statistically significant difference: The use and abuse of subgroup analyses

Quality of Life Research

Volumn 18, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 527-530

  Fayers, Peter M ^a,b   King, Madeleine T ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN   (United Kingdom)

^b NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACETYLSALICYLIC ACID; PLACEBO; RIZATRIPTAN; STREPTOKINASE;

ACUTE HEART INFARCTION; ANALYTICAL ERROR; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DRUG EFFICACY; FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; HUMAN; HYPOTHESIS; MENSTRUAL MIGRAINE; MIGRAINE; MYSTICISM; PAIN ASSESSMENT; POST HOC ANALYSIS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; SAMPLE SIZE; SELF REPORT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SUBGROUP ANALYSIS; TREATMENT RESPONSE; VALIDITY;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 67349158642     PISSN: 09629343     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11136-009-9473-3     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. ISIS-2 (Second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group 1988 Randomised trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-2 Lancet ii 349 360
2. JM Bland DG Altman 1995 Multiple significance tests: The Bonferroni method British Medical Journal 310 170
3. Y Hochberg 1988 A sharper Bonferroni procedure for multiple tests of significance Biometrika 75 800 802 10.1093/biomet/75.4.800
4. AJ Sankoh MF Huque SD Dubey 1997 Some comments on frequently used multiple endpoint adjustment methods in clinical trials Statistics in Medicine 16 2529 2542 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19971130)16:22<2529::AID-SIM692>3.0. CO;2-J
5. SF Assmann SJ Pocock LE Enos LE Kasten 2000 Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials Lancet 355 1064 1069 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02039-0
6. ST Brookes E Whitely M Egger GD Smith PA Mulheran TJ Peters 2004 Subgroup analyses in randomized trials: Risks of subgroup-specific analyses; power and sample size for the interaction test Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 57 229 236 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.08.009
7. R Horton 2000 Commentary: From star signs to trial guidelines Lancet 355 1033 1034 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02031-6
8. R Peto 1990 Misleading subgroup analyses in GISSI The American Journal of Cardiology 66 771 772 10.1016/0002-9149(90)91149-Z
9. S Yusuf J Wittes J Probstfield HA Tyroler 1991 Analysis and interpretation of treatment effects in subgroups of patients in randomised clinical trials Journal of the American Medical Association 266 93 98 10.1001/jama.266.1.93
10. Brookes, S. T., Whitley, E., Peters, T. J., Mulheran, P. A., Egger, M., & Davey Smith, G. (2001). Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: Quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives. Health Technology Assessment, 5(33), 1-56. From http://www.hta.nhs.uk/fullmono/mon533.pdf. Accessed 12 March 2009.
11. J-M Grouin M Coste J Lewis 2005 Subgroup analyses in randomized clinical trials: Statistical and regulatory issues Journal of Biopharmaceutical Statistics 15 869 882 10.1081/BIP-200067988
12. R Wang SW Lagakos JH Ware DJ Hunter JM Drazen 2007 Statistics in medicine-reporting of subgroup analyses in clinical trials The New England Journal of Medicine 357 2189 2194 10.1056/NEJMsr077003
13. V Martin R Cady A Mauskop LS Seidman A Rodgers CM Hustard KE Ramsey F Skobieranda 2008 Efficacy of rizatriptan for menstrual migraine in an early intervention model: A prospective subgroup analysis of the rizatriptan TAME (Treat a Migraine Early) studies Headache 48 226 235