Post-randomisation exclusions: the intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis
Top Cited Papers
- 21 September 2002
- Vol. 325 (7365) , 652-654
- https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.325.7365.652
Abstract
When is it legitimate to exclude randomised patients from the analysis of data in clinical trials? Basing their analysis on the desirability of minimising bias and random error, the authors consider the circumstances when it may be possible to exclude patients, even in an intention to treat trialKeywords
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trialsPublished by Elsevier ,2004
- Vasopressin versus epinephrine for inhospital cardiac arrest: a randomised controlled trialThe Lancet, 2001
- Randomized controlled comparison of epidural bupivacaine versus pethidine for analgesia in labourBritish Journal of Anaesthesia, 2000
- Efficacy and Safety of the Oral Neuraminidase Inhibitor Oseltamivir in Treating Acute InfluenzaJAMA, 2000
- Randomised controlled trial comparing transfusion of leucocyte-depleted or buffy-coat-depleted blood in surgery for colorectal cancerThe Lancet, 1994
- Recombinant Human Interleukin 1 Receptor Antagonist in the Treatment of Patients With Sepsis SyndromeJAMA, 1994
- Intention-to-Treat Analysis: Implications for Quantitative and Qualitative ResearchInternational Journal of Epidemiology, 1992
- Definitions for Sepsis and Organ Failure and Guidelines for the Use of Innovative Therapies in SepsisChest, 1992
- Analysis of clinical trials by treatment actually received: Is it really an option?Statistics in Medicine, 1991
- On estimating efficacy from clinical trialsStatistics in Medicine, 1991