Multiplicity in randomised trials I: endpoints and treatments.
Multiplicity problems emerge from investigators looking at many additional endpoints and treatment group comparisons. Thousands of potential comparisons can emanate from one trial. Investigators might only report the significant comparisons, an unscientific practice if unwitting, and fraudulent if i...
| Publicado en: | Lancet Vol. 365; no. 9470; pp. 1591 - 1596 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , |
| Formato: | tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Lancet
4/30/2005
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=106522861&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 106522861 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 01406736 LAN jtl: Lancet issn: 01406736 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: 4/30/2005 vid: 365 iid: 9470 pid: 1297 pub: Lancet place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania artinfo: ui: 106522861 106522861 NLM15866314 2009031456 10.1016/s0140-6736(05)66461-6 NLM15866314 106522861 ppf: 1591 ppct: 5 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: Multiplicity in randomised trials I: endpoints and treatments. aug: au: Schulz KF Grimes DA Schulz, Kenneth F Grimes, David A affil: Family Health International, PO Box 13950, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 USA sug: subj: Clinical Trials Methods Data Analysis, Statistical Methods Study Design ab: Multiplicity problems emerge from investigators looking at many additional endpoints and treatment group comparisons. Thousands of potential comparisons can emanate from one trial. Investigators might only report the significant comparisons, an unscientific practice if unwitting, and fraudulent if intentional. Researchers must report all the endpoints analysed and treatments compared. Some statisticians propose statistical adjustments to account for multiplicity. Simply defined, they test for no effects in all the primary endpoints undertaken versus an effect in one or more of those endpoints. In general, statistical adjustments for multiplicity provide crude answers to an irrelevant question. However, investigators should use adjustments when the clinical decision-making argument rests solely on one or more of the primary endpoints being significant. In these cases, adjustments somewhat rescue scattershot analyses. Readers need to be aware of the potential for under-reporting of analyses. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|