Covariate adjustment had similar benefits in small and large randomized controlled trials

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 68, Issue 9, 2015, Pages 1068-1075

  Thompson, Douglas D ^a   Lingsma, Hester F ^b   Whiteley, William N ^a,c   Murray, Gordon D ^a   Steyerberg, Ewout W ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^b ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Chance imbalance; Covariate adjustment; Logistic regression analysis; Randomized trial; Sample size; Simulation

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF COVARIANCE; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EFFECT SIZE; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOM SAMPLE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; STRATEGIC PLANNING; THERAPY EFFECT; AGED; BRAIN ISCHEMIA; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; MALE; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; STATISTICAL MODEL; STROKE; VERY ELDERLY;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BRAIN ISCHEMIA; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, STATISTICAL; MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; SAMPLE SIZE; STROKE;

EID: 84939431258     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.11.001     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. S.J. Senn Statistical issues in drug development 2nd ed. 2007 Wiley Hoboken
2. E.W. Steyerberg, P.M.M. Bossuyt, and K.L. Lee Clinical trials in acute myocardial infarction: should we adjust for baseline characteristics? Am Heart J 139 5 2000 745 751
3. E.L. Turner, P. Perel, T. Clayton, P. Edwards, A.V. Hernández, I. Roberts, and et al. Covariate adjustment increased power in randomized controlled trials: an example in traumatic brain injury J Clin Epidemiol 65 2012 474 481
4. B. Kahan, V. Jairath, C. Dore, and T. Morris The risks and rewards of covariate adjustment in randomized trials: an assessment of 12 outcomes from 8 studies Trials 15 1 2014 139
5. A.V. Hernández, E.W. Steyerberg, and J.D.F. Habbema Covariate adjustment in randomized controlled trials with dichotomous outcomes increases statistical power and reduces sample size requirements J Clin Epidemiol 57 2004 454 460
6. K. Schulz, D. Altman, D. Moher CONSORT Group CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials BMC Med 8 1 2010 18
7. L.-M. Yu, A.-W. Chan, S. Hopewell, J. Deeks, and D. Altman Reporting on covariate adjustment in randomised controlled trials before and after revision of the 2001 CONSORT statement: a literature review Trials 11 1 2010 59
8. The GUSTO Investigators. An international randomized trial comparing four thrombolytic strategies for acute myocardial infarction N Engl J Med 329 1993 673 682
9. IST Collaborative Group. The International Stroke Trial (IST): a randomised trial of aspirin, subcutaneous heparin, both, or neither among 19435 patients with acute ischaemic stroke Lancet 349 1997 1569 1581
10. P. Sandercock, M. Niewada, A. Czlonkowska the International Stroke Trial Collaborative Group The International Stroke Trial database Trials 12 1 2011 101
11. K.L. Lee, L.H. Woodlief, E.J. Topol, W.D. Weaver, A. Betriu, J. Col, and et al. Predictors of 30-day mortality in the era of reperfusion for acute myocardial infarction: results from an international trial of 41,021 patients Circulation 91 1995 1659 1668
12. J.M. Veerbeek, G. Kwakkel, E.E.H. van Wegen, J.C.F. Ket, and M.W. Heymans Early prediction of outcome of activities of daily living after stroke: a systematic review Stroke 42 5 2011 1482 1488
13. R.M. Califf, L.H. Woodlief, F.E. Harrell Jr., K.L. Lee, H.D. White, A. Guerci, and et al. Selection of thrombolytic therapy for individual patients: development of a clinical model Am Heart J 133 1997 630 639
14. E.W. Steyerberg Clinical prediction models: a practical approach to development, validation, and updating 2009 Springer New York
15. Harrell FE. rms: Regression modeling strategies. R package version 3.6-3. 2013. Available at http://CRANR-projectorg/package=rms. Accessed Feburary 2014.
16. N.J.D. Nagelkerke A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination Biometrika 78 3 1991 691 692
17. M.H. Gail, S. Wieand, and S. Piantadosi Biased estimates of treatment effect in randomized experiments with nonlinear regressions and omitted covariates Biometrika 71 3 1984 431 444
18. L.D. Robinson, and N.P. Jewell Some surprising results about covariate adjustment in logistic regression models Int Stat Rev 59 2 1991 227 240
19. W.W. Hauck, J.M. Neuhaus, J.D. Kalbfleisch, and S. Anderson A consequence of omitted covariates when estimating odds ratios J Clin Epidemiol 44 1991 77 81
20. W.W. Hauck, S. Anderson, and S.M. Marcus Should we adjust for covariates in nonlinear regression analyses of randomized trials? Control Clin Trials 19 1998 249 256
21. I. Ford, and J. Norrie The role of covariates in estimating treatment effects and risk in long-term clinical trials Stat Med 21 2002 2899 2908
22. S.J. Pocock, S.E. Assmann, L.E. Enos, and L.E. Kasten Subgroup analysis, covariate adjustment and baseline comparisons in clinical trial reporting: current practice and problems Stat Med 21 2002 2917 2930
23. A.V. Hernández, E.W. Steyerberg, I. Butcher, N. Mushkudiani, G.S. Taylor, G.D. Murray, and et al. Adjustment for strong predictors of outcome in traumatic brain injury trials: 25% reduction in sample size requirements in the IMPACT study J Neurotrauma 23 9 2006 1295 1303
24. P. Peduzzi, J. Concato, E. Kemper, T.R. Holford, and A.R. Feinstein A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis J Clin Epidemiol 49 1996 1373 1379
25. E. Vittinghoff, and C.E. McCulloch Relaxing the rule of ten events per variable in logistic and Cox regression Am J Epidemiol 165 2007 710 718
26. B. Kahan, and T. Morris Adjusting for multiple prognostic factors in the analysis of randomised trials BMC Med Res Methodol 13 2013 99
27. F.E. Harrell Regression modeling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic regression, and survival analysis 2001 Springer New York
28. European Medicines Agency. Guideline on adjustment for baseline covariates. 2014; Available at http://www.ema.europa.eu/ema/. Accessed April 7, 2014.
29. D. Kent, P. Rothwell, J. Ioannidis, D. Altman, and R. Hayward Assessing and reporting heterogeneity in treatment effects in clinical trials: a proposal Trials 11 1 2010 85
30. R. Chu, S.D. Walter, G. Guyatt, P.J. Devereaux, M. Walsh, K. Thorlund, and et al. Assessment and implication of prognostic imbalance in randomized controlled trials with a binary outcome - a simulation study PLoS One 7 5 2012 e36677
31. S.J. Senn Covariate imbalance and random allocation in clinical trials Stat Med 8 1989 467 475
32. D.G. Altman Comparability of randomised groups J R Stat Soc Ser D 34 1 1985 125 136
33. B.C. Kahan, and T.P. Morris Improper analysis of trials randomised using stratified blocks or minimisation Stat Med 31 2012 328 340
34. S. Senn Testing for baseline balance in clinical trials Stat Med 13 1994 1715 1726