Back to Search
Start Over
Evidence-based Urology: Subgroup Analysis in Randomized Controlled Trials
- Source :
- European urology focus. 7(6)
- Publication Year :
- 2021
-
Abstract
- In randomized controlled trials, investigators often explore the possibility that the treatment effects differ between subgroups (eg, women vs men, old vs young, more versus less severe disease). Investigators often inappropriately claim subgroup effects (also called “effect modification” or “interaction”) when the likelihood of a true effect modification is low. Criteria for assessing the credibility of subgroup analyses, nicely summarized in a formal Instrument for Assessing the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses (ICEMAN), include investigator postulation of a priori hypotheses with a specified direction; support from prior evidence; a low likelihood that chance explains the apparent subgroup effect; and only testing a small number of subgroup hypotheses. Patient summary Randomized clinical trials often use subgroup analyses to explore whether a treatment is more or less effective in a particular patient subgroup (eg, women vs men, old vs young). In this mini-review, we explore the common pitfalls of subgroup analyses.
- Subjects :
- Male
medicine.medical_specialty
Evidence-based practice
business.industry
Urology
Severe disease
Subgroup analysis
3. Good health
030218 nuclear medicine & medical imaging
law.invention
03 medical and health sciences
0302 clinical medicine
Randomized controlled trial
law
030220 oncology & carcinogenesis
Internal medicine
Credibility
Medicine
Humans
Female
business
Patient summary
Effect modification
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 24054569
- Volume :
- 7
- Issue :
- 6
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- European urology focus
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....4a323ffd2fd682f19193396c388ffb88