Erratum: “A systematic survey identified 36 criteria for assessing effect modification claims in randomized trials or meta-analyses” (Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (2019) 113 (159–167), (S0895435618308576), (10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.05.014));A systematic survey identified 36 criteria for assessing effect modification claims in randomized trials or meta-analyses

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 113, Issue , 2019, Pages 159-167

  Schandelmaier, Stefan ^a,b   Chang, Yaping ^a   Devasenapathy, Niveditha ^c   Devji, Tahira ^a   Kwong, Joey S W ^d   Colunga Lozano, Luis E ^a   Lee, Yung ^a,e   Agarwal, Arnav ^f   Bhatnagar, Neera ^a   Ewald, Hannah ^b   Zhang, Ying ^a,g   Sun, Xin ^h   Thabane, Lehana ^a,i   Walsh, Michael ^a   Briel, Matthias ^a,b   Guyatt, Gordon H ^a  

^a MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL BASEL   (Switzerland)

^c PUBLIC HEALTH FOUNDATION OF INDIA   (India)

^d and Hong Kong Branch of CAS Center for Excellence in Animal Evolution and Genetics   (Hong Kong)

^e MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^f UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^g BEIJING UNIVERSITY OF CHINESE MEDICINE   (China)

^h SICHUAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

ⁱ MCMASTER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Clinical trials as topic (MeSH); Epidemiologic methods (MeSH); Health care evaluation mechanisms (MeSH); Meta analysis as topic (MeSH); Precision medicine (MeSH); Subgroup analysis

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHECKLIST; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TAXONOMY; MEASUREMENT ACCURACY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; RESEARCH;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; DATA ACCURACY; HUMANS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH REPORT;

EID: 85067701060     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.04.003     Document Type: Erratum

References (55)

1. Rothwell, P.M., Treating individuals 2. Subgroup analysis in randomised controlled trials: importance, indications, and interpretation. Lancet 365 (2005), 176–186.
2. Pincus, T., Miles, C., Froud, R., Underwood, M., Carnes, D., Taylor, S.J., Methodological criteria for the assessment of moderators in systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials: a consensus study. BMC Med Res Methodol, 11, 2011, 14.
3. Gagnier, J.J., Moher, D., Boon, H., Beyene, J., Bombardier, C., Investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews: a methodologic review of guidance in the literature. BMC Med Res Methodol, 12, 2012, 111.
4. West, S.L., Gartlehner, G., Mansfield, A.J., Poole, C., Tant, E., Lenfestey, N., et al. Comparative Effectiveness Review Methods: Clinical Heterogeneity. 2010, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Methods Research Paper AHRQ Publication No 10-EHC070-EF. Available at http://effectivehealthcareahrqgov/. (Accessed 1 March 2019)
5. Varadhan, R., Stuart, E.A., Louis, T.A., Segal, J.B., Weiss, C.O., Review of guidance documents for selected methods in patient centered outcomes research: standards in addressing heterogeneity of treatment effectiveness in observational and experimental patient centered outcomes research. 2012 Available at pcori.org. (Accessed 1 March 2019)
6. van Hoorn, R., Tummers, M., Booth, A., Gerhardus, A., Rehfuess, E., Hind, D., et al. The development of CHAMP: a checklist for the appraisal of moderators and predictors. BMC Med Res Methodol, 17, 2017, 173.
7. Gagnier, J.J., Morgenstern, H., Altman, D.G., Berlin, J., Chang, S., McCulloch, P., et al. Consensus-based recommendations for investigating clinical heterogeneity in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol, 13, 2013, 106.
8. VanderWeele, T.J., Knol, M.J., Interpretation of subgroup analyses in randomized trials: heterogeneity versus secondary interventions. Ann Intern Med 154 (2011), 680–683.
9. Brookes, S.T., Whitley, E., Peters, T.J., Mulheran, P.A., Egger, M., Davey Smith, G., Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives. Health Technol Assess 5:33 (2001), 1–56.
10. Donegan, S., Williams, L., Dias, S., Tudur-Smith, C., Welton, N., Exploring treatment by covariate interactions using subgroup analysis and meta-regression in cochrane reviews: a review of recent practice. PLoS One, 10, 2015, e0128804.
11. Burke, J.F., Sussman, J.B., Kent, D.M., Hayward, R.A., Three simple rules to ensure reasonably credible subgroup analyses. BMJ, 351, 2015, h5651.
12. European Medicines Agency. Guideline on the investigation of subgroups in confirmatory clinical trials (draft). 2014, European Medicines Agency, London, UK.
13. Koch, A., Framke, T., Reliably basing conclusions on subgroups of randomized clinical trials. J Biopharm Stat 24:1 (2014), 42–57.
14. Wang, S.J., Hung, H.M., A regulatory perspective on essential considerations in design and analysis of subgroups when correctly classified. J Biopharm Stat 24:1 (2014), 19–41.
15. Desai, M., Pieper, K.S., Mahaffey, K., Challenges and solutions to pre- and post-randomization subgroup analyses. Curr Cardiol Rep, 16(10), 2014, 531.
16. Sun, X., Ioannidis, J.P., Agoritsas, T., Alba, A.C., Guyatt, G., How to use a subgroup analysis: users' guide to the medical literature. JAMA 311 (2014), 405–411.
17. Paget, M.A., Chuang-Stein, C., Fletcher, C., Reid, C., Subgroup analyses of clinical effectiveness to support health technology assessments. Pharm Stat 10:6 (2011), 532–538.
18. Higgins, J.P., Green, S.B., (eds.) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions Version 5.1.0, 2011, The Cochrane Collaboration.
19. Sun, X., Briel, M., Walter, S.D., Guyatt, G.H., Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses. BMJ, 340, 2010, c117.
20. Kent, D.M., Rothwell, P.M., Ioannidis, J.P., Altman, D.G., Hayward, R.A., Assessing and reporting heterogeneity in treatment effects in clinical trials: a proposal. Trials, 11, 2010, 85.
21. Fernandez, Y.G.E., Nguyen, H., Duan, N., Gabler, N.B., Kravitz, R.L., Assessing heterogeneity of treatment effects: are authors misinterpreting their results?. Health Serv Res 45 (2010), 283–301.
22. Dijkman, B., Kooistra, B., Bhandari, M., Evidence-Based Surgery Working Group. How to work with a subgroup analysis. Can J Surg 52:6 (2009), 515–522.
23. Wang, R., Lagakos, S.W., Ware, J.H., Hunter, D.J., Drazen, J.M., Statistics in medicine—reporting of subgroup analyses in clinical trials. N Engl J Med 357 (2007), 2189–2194.
24. Fletcher, J., Subgroup analyses: how to avoid being misled. BMJ 335 (2007), 96–97.
25. Aulakh, A.K., Anand, S.S., Sex and gender subgroup analyses of randomized trials. Womens Health Issues 17:6 (2007), 342–350.
26. Koopman, L., van der Heijden, G.J., Glasziou, P.P., Grobbee, D.E., Rovers, M.M., A systematic review of analytical methods used to study subgroups in (individual patient data) meta-analyses. J Clin Epidemiol 60 (2007), 1002–1009.
27. Hernandez, A.V., Boersma, E., Murray, G.D., Habbema, J.D., Steyerberg, E.W., Subgroup analyses in therapeutic cardiovascular clinical trials: are most of them misleading?. Am Heart J 151 (2006), 257–264.
28. Bhandari, M., Devereaux, P.J., Li, P., Mah, D., Lim, K., Schunemann, H.J., et al. Misuse of baseline comparison tests and subgroup analyses in surgical trials. Clin Orthop Relat Res 447 (2006), 247–251.
29. Grouin, J.M., Coste, M., Lewis, J., Subgroup analyses in randomized clinical trials: statistical and regulatory issues. J Biopharm Stat 15:5 (2005), 869–882.
30. Cook, D.I., Gebski, V.J., Keech, A.C., Subgroup analysis in clinical trials. Med J Aust 180:6 (2004), 289–291.
31. Moreira, E.D., Susser, E., Guidelines on how to assess the validity of results presented in subgroup analysis of clinical trials. Rev Hosp Clin Fac Med Sao Paulo 57:2 (2002), 83–88.
32. Oxman, A.D., Guyatt, G.H., A consumer's guide to subgroup analyses. Ann Intern Med 116 (1992), 78–84.
33. Yusuf, S., Wittes, J., Probstfield, J., Tyroler, H.A., Analysis and interpretation of treatment effects in subgroups of patients in randomized clinical trials. JAMA 266 (1991), 93–98.
34. Wallach, J.D., Sullivan, P.G., Trepanowski, J.F., Sainani, K.L., Steyerberg, E.W., Ioannidis, J.P., Evaluation of evidence of statistical support and corroboration of subgroup claims in randomized clinical trials. JAMA Intern Med 177:4 (2017), 554–560.
35. Wallach, J.D., Sullivan, P.G., Trepanowski, J.F., Steyerberg, E.W., Ioannidis, J.P., Sex based subgroup differences in randomized controlled trials: empirical evidence from Cochrane meta-analyses. BMJ, 355, 2016, i5826.
36. Gabler, N.B., Duan, N., Liao, D., Elmore, J.G., Ganiats, T.G., Kravitz, R.L., Dealing with heterogeneity of treatment effects: is the literature up to the challenge?. Trials, 10, 2009, 43.
37. Saragiotto, B.T., Maher, C.G., Moseley, A.M., Yamato, T.P., Koes, B.W., Sun, X., et al. A systematic review reveals that the credibility of subgroup claims in low back pain trials was low. J Clin Epidemiol 79 (2016), 3–9.
38. Simmonds, M., Stewart, G., Stewart, L., A decade of individual participant data meta-analyses: a review of current practice. Contemp Clin trials 45 (2015), 76–83.
39. Zhang, S., Liang, F., Li, W., Hu, X., Subgroup analyses in reporting of phase III clinical trials in solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 33:15 (2015), 1697–1702.
40. Barton SP, C., Sclafani, F., Cunningham, D., Chau, I., The influence of industry sponsorship on the reporting of subgroup analyses within phase III randomised controlled trials in gastrointestinal oncology. Eur J Cancer 51:18 (2015), 2732–2739.
41. Mistry, D., Patel, S., Hee, S.W., Stallard, N., Underwood, M., Evaluating the quality of subgroup analyses in randomized controlled trials of therapist-delivered interventions for nonspecific low back pain: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 39:7 (2014), 618–629.
42. Kasenda, B., Schandelmaier, S., Sun, X., von Elm, E., You, J., Blumle, A., et al. Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: cohort study on trial protocols and journal publications. BMJ, 349, 2014, g4539.
43. Sun, X., Briel, M., Busse, J.W., You, J.J., Akl, E.A., Mejza, F., et al. Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: systematic review. BMJ, 344, 2012, e1553.
44. Koopman, L., van der Heijden, G.J., Hoes, A.W., Grobbee, D.E., Rovers, M.M., Empirical comparison of subgroup effects in conventional and individual patient data meta-analyses. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 24:3 (2008), 358–361.
45. Patsopoulos, N.A., Tatsioni, A., Ioannidis, J.P., Claims of sex differences: an empirical assessment in genetic associations. JAMA 298 (2007), 880–893.
46. Higgins JT, S., Deeks, J., Altman, D., Statistical heterogeneity in systematic reviews of clinical trials: a critical appraisal of guidelines and practice. J Health Serv Res Policy 7 (2002), 51–61.
47. Pocock, S.J., Assmann, S.E., Enos, L.E., Kasten, L.E., Subgroup analysis, covariate adjustment and baseline comparisons in clinical trial reporting: current practice and problems. Stat Med 21 (2002), 2917–2930.
48. Assmann, S.F., Pocock, S.J., Enos, L.E., Kasten, L.E., Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials. Lancet 355 (2000), 1064–1069.
49. Parker, A.B., Naylor, C.D., Subgroups, treatment effects, and baseline risks: some lessons from major cardiovascular trials. Am Heart J 139 (2000), 952–961.
50. Alosh, M., Huque, M.F., Multiplicity considerations for subgroup analysis subject to consistency constraint. Biom J 55:3 (2013), 444–462.
51. Lipkovich, I., Dmitrienko, A., Agostino, B.R.D.' Sr., Tutorial in biostatistics: data-driven subgroup identification and analysis in clinical trials. Stat Med 36 (2017), 136–196.
52. Royston, P., Sauerbrei, W., A new approach to modelling interactions between treatment and continuous covariates in clinical trials by using fractional polynomials. Stat Med 23 (2004), 2509–2525.
53. Royston, P., Sauerbrei, W., Interaction of treatment with a continuous variable: simulation study of significance level for several methods of analysis. Stat Med 32 (2013), 3788–3803.
54. Royston, P., Sauerbrei, W., Interaction of treatment with a continuous variable: simulation study of power for several methods of analysis. Stat Med 33 (2014), 4695–4708.
55. Varadhan, R., Wang, S.J., Standardization for subgroup analysis in randomized controlled trials. J Biopharm Stat 24:1 (2014), 154–167.