PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 15526517

Trend in randomized controlled trials.

Abstract

Virtually any study may achieve statistical significance if we increase the sample size indefinitely. We cannot discuss about trend without interpreting confidence intervals (CI). The sample size being computed function of the magnitude of the clinical effect is considered worth detecting, when the result is not statistically significant, it is neither clinically significant. Increasing the sample, the "trend" can disappear or even change its direction.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

C Băicuş. 2003. Trend in randomized controlled trials.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15526517/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

New confidence intervals for the difference between two sensitivities at a fixed level of specificity.

For two continuous-scale diagnostic tests, it is of interest to compare their sensitivities at a predetermined level of specificity. In this paper, we propose three new intervals for the difference between two sensitivities at a fixed level of specificity. These intervals are easy to compute. We also conduct simulation studies to compare the relative performance of the new intervals with the existing normal- approximation-based interval proposed by Wieand et al. Our simulation results show that the newly proposed intervals perform better than the existing normal-approximation-based interval in terms of coverage accuracy and interval length.

Confidence Intervals↗

Four-fold table cell frequencies imputation in meta analysis.

Meta analysis is a collection of quantitative methods devoted to combine summary information from related but independent studies. Because research reports usually present only data reductions and summary statistics rather than detailed data, the reviewer must often resort to rather crude methods for constructing summary effect estimate suitable for meta analysis pooling methods. When the studies involve a binary variable, both number of events and sample sizes are required to compute pooled estimate and its confidence interval. Sometimes, only summary statistics and related confidence intervals are provided in the publication. Although it is possible to estimate the standard error of each study's effect measure using the confidence interval from each study, this lack of detailed data compels the reviewers to use the inverse variance method to perform meta analysis, or to exclude the works with incomplete data. This paper shows three methods to reconstruct four-fold tables when summary measures for binary data and related confidence intervals and sample sizes are provided. The methods are discussed through a wider application example to assess the reconstruction precision, and the impact of using reconstructed data on meta analysis results. These methods seem to yield a correct reconstruction if original measures are reported at least with two decimal places. Meta analysis results do not seem seriously affected by the use of reconstructed data. These methods allow the reviewer to use full meta analysis statistical tools, instead of the simple inverse variance method, and can greatly contribute to the completeness of systematic reviews.

Confidence Intervals↗

Bivariate isotonic design for dose-finding with ordered groups.

We consider the problem of dose-finding where subjects can be stratified into two populations with possibly different susceptibility to toxicity. The goal is to find the maximally tolerated dose for each population. We propose a non-parametric design for this problem. Toxicity is estimated using the bivariate isotonic regression estimator. The new design is compared with the two-sample continual reassessment method.

Confidence Intervals↗