Research
Print page Print page
Switch language
Rigshospitalet - a part of Copenhagen University Hospital
Published

Assessment of assumptions of statistical analysis methods in randomised clinical trials: the what and how

Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

  1. Was amorphous aluminium hydroxyphosphate sulfate adequately evaluated before authorisation in Europe?

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Methylphenidate for ADHD rejected from the WHO Essential Medicines List due to uncertainties in benefit-harm profile

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Blinding in randomised clinical trials of psychological interventions: a retrospective study of published trial reports

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Considerations on the strengths and limitations of using disease-related mortality as an outcome in clinical research

    Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debateResearchpeer-review

  1. Early specialised palliative care: interventions, symptoms, problems

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  2. Was amorphous aluminium hydroxyphosphate sulfate adequately evaluated before authorisation in Europe?

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  3. Low-dose hydrocortisone in patients with COVID-19 and severe hypoxia: the COVID STEROID randomised, placebo-controlled trial

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

  4. Ongoing and future COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials: challenges and opportunities

    Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

View graph of relations

When analysing and presenting results ofrandomised clinical trials, trialists rarely report if or how underlying statisticalassumptions were validated. To avoid data-driven biased trial results, it should be common practice to prospectively describe the assessments of underlying assumptions. In existing literature, there is no consensus onhow trialists should assess and report underlying assumptions for the analysesof randomised clinical trials. With this study, we developed suggestions on howto test and validate underlying assumptions behind logistic regression, linearregression, and Cox regression when analysing results of randomised clinicaltrials.Two investigators compiled an initial draft based on a review of the literature. Experienced statisticians and trialists from eight different research centres and trial units then participated in a anonymised consensus process, where we reached agreement on the suggestions presented in this paper.This paper provides detailed suggestions on 1) whichunderlying statistical assumptions behind logistic regression, multiple linear regression and Cox regressioneach should be assessed; 2) how these underlying assumptions may be assessed;and 3) what to do if these assumptions are violated.We believe that the validity of randomised clinical trial results will increase if our recommendations for assessing and dealing with violations of the underlying statistical assumptions are followed.

Original languageEnglish
Article number111268
JournalBMJ Evidence-Based Medicine
Volume26
Issue number3
Pages (from-to)121-126
Number of pages6
ISSN1356-5524
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2021

    Research areas

  • epidemiology, statistics & research methods

ID: 59221992