Intention to treat analysis, compliance, drop-outs and how to deal with missing data in clinical research: a review

Physical Therapy Reviews

Volumn 14, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 36-49

  Armijo Olivo, Susan ^a   Warren, Sharon ^a   Magee, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

Author keywords

COMPLIANCE; EFFECTIVENESS; EFFICACY; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; MISSING DATA; RANDOMISED CLINICAL TRIALS; REVIEW

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958096534     PISSN: 10833196     EISSN: 1743288X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1179/174328809X405928     Document Type: Review

References (48)

1. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Internal Med 2001; 134: 663–694.
2. Ruiz-Canela M, Martinez-Gonzalez MA, De Irala-Estevez J. Intention to treat analysis is related to methodological quality. BMJ 2000; 320: 1007–1008.
3. Olivo SA, Macedo LG, Gadotti IC, Fuentes J, Stanton T, Magee DJ. Scales to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials: A systematic review. Phys Ther 2008; 88: 156–175.
4. Herbert R, Jamtvedt G, Mead J, Birger Hagen K. Chapter 3: What constiutes evidence; What constitutes evidence about effects of interventions? In: Herbert R, Jamtvedt G, Mead J, Birger Hagen K, editors. Practical evidence-based physiotherapy. Edinburgh: Elsevier; 2005. p. 20–34.
5. Machin D. General Issues. In: Machin D, Day S, Green S, editors. Textbook of Clinical Trials. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; 2004. p. 11–44.
6. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias: Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. J Amer Med Assoc 1995; 273: 408–412.
7. Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, Schulz KF, Juni P, Altman DG, et al. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: Meta- epidemiological study. BMJ 2008; 336: 601–605.
8. Kunz R, Vist G, Oxman AD. Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials. Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 2007.
9. Fisher L. Intention to Treat in Clinical Trials. In: Peace K, editor. Statistical Issues in Drug Research and Development. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1990. p. 331–350.
10. Deeks J, Higgins J, Altman D. Analyzing and Presenting the results. In: Higgins J, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 4–2–5. Section 8: Cochrane Library, issue 3, 2005. Chichester UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.; 2005.
11. Lachin JM. Statistical considerations in the intent-to-treat principle. Control Clin Trials 2000; 21: 167–189.
12. Gibaldi M, Sullivan S. Intention-to-treat analysis in randomized trials: Who gets counted? J Clin Pharmacol 1997; 37: 667–672.
13. Pocock SJ, Abdalla M. The hope and the hazards of using compliance data in randomized controlled trials. Stat Med 1998; 17: 303–317.
14. Higgins J, Deeks J, Altman D, Group obotCSM. Chapter 16: Special topics in statistics. In: Higgins J, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.0 [updated February 2008].: The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008. Available from www.cochrane-handbook.org; 2008.
15. Armitage P. The analysis of data from clinical trials. Statistician 1979; 28: 171–183.
16. Hollis S, Campbell F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ 1999; 319: 670–674.
17. Marley J., Editorial : Efficacy, effectiveness, efficiency. Aust Prescr 2000; 23: 114–115.
18. Fergusson D, Aaron SD, Guyatt G, Hebert P. Post-randomisation exclusions: The intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis. BMJ 2002; 325: 652–654.
19. Sheiner LB, Rubin DB. Intention-to-treat analysis and the goals of clinical trials. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1995;57: 6–15.
20. Portney L, Walkins M. Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall; 2000.
21. Wright CC, Sim J. Intention-to-treat approach to data from randomized controlled trials: A sensitivity analysis. J Clin Epidemiol 2003; 56: 833–842.
22. Heritier SR, Gebski VJ, Keech AC. Inclusion of patients in clinical trial analysis: The intention-to-treat principle. Med J Aust 2003; 179: 438–440.
23. Tillmann HC, Sharpe N, Sponer G, Wehling M. Does intention-to- treat analysis answer all questions in long-term mortality trials? Considerations on the basis of the ANZ trial. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2001; 39: 205–212.
24. Baron G, Boutron I, Giraudeau B, Ravaud P. Violation of the intent-to-treat principle and rate of missing data in superiority trials assessing structural outcomes in rheumatic diseases. Arthr Rheuma 2005; 52: 1858–1865.
25. Unnebrink K, Windeler J. Intention-to-treat: Methods for dealing with missing values in clinical trials of progressively deteriorating diseases. Stat Med 2001; 20: 3931–3946.
26. Horwitz RI, Viscoli CM, Berkman L, Donaldson RM, Horwitz SM, Murray CJ, et al. Treatment adherence and risk of death after a myocardial infarction. Lancet 1990; 336: 542–545.
27. Clarke GN. Improving the transition from basic efficacy research to effectiveness studies: Methodological issues and procedures. J Consult Clin Psychol 1995; 63: 718–725.
28. Jo B. Statistical power in randomized intervention studies with noncompliance. Psychol Meth 2002; 7: 178–193.
29. Nich C, Carroll KM. ‘Intention-to-treat’ meets ‘missing data’: Implications of alternate strategies for analyzing clinical trials data. Drug Alc Depend 2002; 68: 121–130.
30. Pocock S. Chapter 12: Protocol Deviations. In: Pocock S, editor. Clinical Trials. New York: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.; 1983. p. 176–186.
31. Frangakis CE, Rubin DB. Addressing complications of intention- to-treat analysis in the combined presence of all-or-none treatment- noncompliance and subsequent missing outcomes. Biometrika 1999; 86: 365–379.
32. Montori VM, Guyatt GH. Intention-to-treat principle. Can Med Assoc J 2001; 165: 1339–1341.
33. Horvitz-Lennon M, O’Malley AJ, Frank RG, Normand SLT. Improving traditional intention-to-treat analyses: A new approach. Psychol Med 2005; 35: 961–970.
34. Rubin DB. Inference and missing data. Biometrika 1976; 63: 581–592.
35. Abraham WT, Russell DW. Missing data: A review of current methods and applications in epidemiological research. Curr Opin Psychiat 2004; 17: 315–321.
36. Gadbury GL, Coffey CS, Allison DB. Modern statistical methods for handling missing repeated measurements in obesity trial data: Beyond LOCF. Obes Rev 2003; 4: 175–184.
37. Potthoff RF, Tudor GE, Pieper KS, Hasselblad V. Can one assess whether missing data are missing at random in medical studies? Stat Meth Med Res 2006; 15: 213–234.
38. Streiner D, Geddes J. Intention to treat analysis in clinical trials when there are missing data. Evid Based Ment Health 2001; 4: 70–71.
39. Perez A, Dennis RJ, Gil JFA, Rondon MA, Lopez A. Use of the mean, hot deck and multiple imputation techniques to predict outcome in intensive care unit patients in Colombia. Stat Med 2002; 21: 3885–3896.
40. Little R, Yau L. Intent-to-treat analysis for longitudinal studies with drop-outs. Biometrics 1996; 52: 1324–1333.
41. Mallinckrodt CH, Sanger TM, Dube S, DeBrota DJ, Molenberghs G, Carroll RJ, et al. Assessing and interpreting treatment effects in longitudinal clinical trials with missing data. Biol Psychiat 2003; 53: 754–760.
42. Demissie S, LaValley MP, Horton NJ, Glynn RJ, Cupples LA. Bias due to missing exposure data using complete-case analysis in the proportional hazards regression model. Stat Med 2003; 22: 545–557.
43. Shih WJ. Problems in dealing with missing data and informative censoring in clinical trials. Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med 2002; 3.
44. Whittaker K, Sutton C, Burton C. Pragmatic randomised controlled trials in parenting research: The issue of intention to treat. J Epidemiol Commun Health 2006; 60: 858–864.
45. Hardin JM. The principle of intention to treat analysis in clinical studies: Its use and controversies. J Pharm Pract 1998; 11: 231–238.
46. Bubbar VK, Kreder HJ. The intention-to-treat principle: A primer for the orthopaedic surgeon. J Bone Joint Surg - Ser A 2006; 88: 2097–2099.
47. Winnock M, Rancinan C, De Ledinghen V, Couzigou P, Chene G, Brillanti S, et al. What hides behind an intention-to-treat analysis? Hepatology 2001; 33: 1014–1015.
48. Walter SD, Guyatt G, Montori VM, Cook R, Prasad K. A new preference-based analysis for randomized trials can estimate treatment acceptability and effect in compliant patients. J Clin Epidemiol 2006; 59: 685–696.