Modified versus standard intention-to-treat reporting: Are there differences in methodological quality, sponsorship, and findings in randomized trials? A cross-sectional study

Trials

Volumn 12, Issue , 2011, Pages

  Montedori, Alessandro ^a   Bonacini, Maria I ^b   Casazza, Giovanni ^c   Luchetta, Maria L ^d   Duca, Piergiorgio ^c   Cozzolino, Francesco ^a   Abraha, Iosief ^a  

^a Regional Health Authority of Umbria   (Italy)

^b DERRIFORD HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MILAN   (Italy)

^d Azienda Sanitaria Locale 3 ^*  (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HUMAN; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY; QUALITY CONTROL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; DRUG INDUSTRY; ECONOMICS; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; RISK; STANDARD; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; CONFLICT OF INTEREST; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DATA INTERPRETATION, STATISTICAL; DRUG INDUSTRY; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; ODDS RATIO; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; RESEARCH SUPPORT AS TOPIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 79952066236     PISSN: 17456215     EISSN: 17456215     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-58     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Gravel J, Opatrny L, Shapiro S. The intention-to-treat approach in randomized controlled trials: are authors saying what they do and doing what they say?. Clin Trials 2007, 4:350-356. 10.1177/1740774507081223, 17848496.
2. Hollis S, Campbell F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ 1999, 319:670-674. 28218, 10480822.
3. Kruse RL, Alper BS, Reust C, Stevermer JJ, Shannon S, Williams RH. Intention-to-treat analysis: who is in? Who is out?. J Fam Pract 2002, 51:969-971.
4. Ruiz-Canela M, Martinez-Gonzalez MA, de Irala-Estevez J. Intention to treat analysis is related to methodological quality. BMJ 2000, 320:1007. 10.1136/bmj.320.7240.1007, 1117880, 10753165.
5. Abraha I, Montedori A. Modified intention to treat reporting in randomised controlled trials: systematic review. BMJ 2010, 340:c2697. 10.1136/bmj.c2697, 2885592, 20547685.
6. Edwards SJ, Lilford RJ, Braunholtz DA, Jackson JC, Hewison J, Thornton J. Ethical issues in the design and conduct of randomised controlled trials. Health Technol Assess 1998, 2:i-vi. 1-132.
7. Gotzsche PC. Believability of relative risks and odds ratios in abstracts: cross sectional study. BMJ 2006, 333:231-234. 10.1136/bmj.38895.410451.79, 1523498, 16854948.
8. Djulbegovic B, Lacevic M, Cantor A, Fields KK, Bennett CL, Adams JR, Kuderer NM, Lyman GH. The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research. Lancet 2000, 356:635-638. 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)02605-2, 10968436.
9. Bekelman JE, Li Y, Gross CP. Scope and impact of financial conflicts of interest in biomedical research: a systematic review. JAMA 2003, 289:454-465. 10.1001/jama.289.4.454, 12533125.
10. Abraha I, Montedori A, Romagnoli C. Modified Intention to Treat: frequency, definition and implication for clinical trials [abstract]. XV Cochrane Colloquium 2007, 86-87. Sao Paulo, Brazil.
11. Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 2003, 326:1167-1170. 10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1167, 156458, 12775614.
12. Schulz KF, Grimes DA, Altman DG, Hayes RJ. Blinding and exclusions after allocation in randomised controlled trials: survey of published parallel group trials in obstetrics and gynaecology. BMJ 1996, 312:742-744. 2350472, 8605459.
13. Tierney JF, Stewart LA. Investigating patient exclusion bias in meta-analysis. Int J Epidemiol 2005, 34:79-87. 10.1093/ije/dyh300, 15561753.
14. Nuesch E, Trelle S, Reichenbach S, Rutjes AW, Burgi E, Scherer M, Altman DG, Juni P. The effects of excluding patients from the analysis in randomised controlled trials: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 2009, 339:b3244. 10.1136/bmj.b3244, 2739282, 19736281.
15. Melander H, Ahlqvist-Rastad J, Meijer G, Beermann B. Evidence b(i)ased medicine--selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications. BMJ 2003, 326:1171-1173. 10.1136/bmj.326.7400.1171, 156459, 12775615.
16. Patsopoulos NA, Ioannidis JP, Analatos AA. Origin and funding of the most frequently cited papers in medicine: database analysis. BMJ 2006, 332:1061-1064. 10.1136/bmj.38768.420139.80, 1458565, 16547014.
17. Rochon PA, Gurwitz JH, Simms RW, Fortin PR, Felson DT, Minaker KL, Chalmers TC. A study of manufacturer-supported trials of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in the treatment of arthritis. Arch Intern Med 1994, 154:157-163. 10.1001/archinte.154.2.157, 8285810.
18. Safer DJ. Design and reporting modifications in industry-sponsored comparative psychopharmacology trials. J Nerv Ment Dis 2002, 190:583-592. 10.1097/00005053-200209000-00002, 12357091.
19. Johansen HK, Gotzsche PC. Problems in the design and reporting of trials of antifungal agents encountered during meta-analysis. JAMA 1999, 282:1752-1759. 10.1001/jama.282.18.1752, 10568648.
20. Tramer MR, Reynolds DJ, Moore RA, McQuay HJ. Impact of covert duplicate publication on meta-analysis: a case study. BMJ 1997, 315:635-640. 2127450, 9310564.
21. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 2010, 152:726-732.