The Challenge of Subgroup Analyses — Reporting without Distorting
Top Cited Papers
- 20 April 2006
- journal article
- editorial
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 354 (16) , 1667-1669
- https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmp068070
Abstract
Subgroup analyses are an important part of the analysis of a comparative clinical trial. However, they are commonly overinterpreted14 and can lead to further research that is misguided or, worse, to suboptimal patient care.Consider a randomized, clinical trial designed to determine whether a new treatment is more effective than an established treatment and assessed with a test, based on all randomized patients, of the null hypothesis that the treatments have equal efficacy, as measured in terms of the primary end point. Then, subgroup analyses are conducted to assess whether different types of patients respond differently to the new . . .Keywords
This publication has 5 references indexed in Scilit:
- Clopidogrel and Aspirin versus Aspirin Alone for the Prevention of Atherothrombotic EventsNew England Journal of Medicine, 2006
- Enoxaparin versus Unfractionated Heparin with Fibrinolysis for ST-Elevation Myocardial InfarctionNew England Journal of Medicine, 2006
- Subgroups, treatment effects, and baseline risks: Some lessons from major cardiovascular trialsAmerican Heart Journal, 2000
- Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trialsThe Lancet, 2000
- Analysis and interpretation of treatment effects in subgroups of patients in randomized clinical trialsPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1991