The case of the misleading composite – one outcome is better than two

Anaesthesia

Volumn 71, Issue 9, 2016, Pages 1101-1103

  Choi, S W ^a   Cheung, C W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CARDIOVASCULAR MORTALITY; CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT; COMPOSITE OUTCOME; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEART ARREST; HEART INFARCTION; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; LUNG EMBOLISM; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POST HOC ANALYSIS; PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REGISTRATION; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; STUDY DESIGN;

EID: 84982095759     PISSN: 00032409     EISSN: 13652044     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/anae.13590     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Choi SW, Tran DH. Calculating sample size. Alpha, Beta, Mu and Sigma – it's all Greek. Anaesthesia 2016; 71: 462–4.
2. Myles PS, Leslie K, Chan MTV, et al. The safety of addition of nitrous oxide to general anaesthesia in at-risk patients having major non-cardiac surgery (ENIGMA-II): a randomised, single-blind trial. Lancet 2014; 384: 1446–54.
3. Choi SW, Wong GT. If at first you don't succeed, try and try again? The dangers of multiple comparisons. Anaesthesia 2016; 71: 718–20.
4. Mascha EJ, Sessler DI. Statistical grand rounds: design and analysis of studies with binary- event composite endpoints: guidelines for anesthesia research. Anesthesia and Analgesia 2011; 112: 1461–71.
5. Montori VM, Permanyer-Miralda G, Ferreira-González I, et al. Validity of composite end points in clinical trials. British Medical Journal 2005; 330: 594–6.
6. Cordoba G, Schwartz L, Woloshin S, Bae H, Gotzsche PC. Definition, reporting, and interpretation of composite outcomes in clinical trials: systematic review. British Medical Journal 2010; 341: c3920.
7. Lim E, Brown A, Helmy A, Mussa S, Altman DG. Composite outcomes in cardiovascular research: a survey of randomized trials. Annals of Internal Medicine 2008; 149: 612–7.
8. Freemantle N, Calvert M, Wood J, Eastaugh J, Griffin C. Composite outcomes in randomized trials: greater precision but with greater uncertainty? Journal of the American Medical Association 2003; 289: 2554–9.
9. TIME Investigators. Trial of invasive versus medical therapy in elderly patients with chronic symptomatic coronary-artery disease (TIME): a randomised trial. Lancet 2001; 358: 951–7.
10. CAPRIE Steering Committee. A randomised, blinded, trial of clopidogrel versus aspirin in patients at risk of ischaemic events (CAPRIE). Lancet 1996; 348: 1329–39.
11. Mascha EJ, Imrey PB. Factors affecting power of tests for multiple binary outcomes. Statistics in Medicine 2010; 29: 2890–904.
12. Legler JM, Lefkopoulu M, Ryan LM. Efficiency and power of tests for multiple binary outcomes. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1995; 90: 680–93.
13. Pogue J, Devereaux PJ, Thabane L, Yusuf S. Designing and analyzing clinical trials with composite outcomes: consideration of possible treatment differences between the individual outcomes. PLoS ONE 2012; 7: e34785.
14. Pogue J, Thabane L, Devereaux PJ, Yusuf S. Testing for heterogeneity among the components of a binary composite outcome in a clinical trial. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2010; 10: 49.