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

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

    Research output: Contribution to journalReviewResearchpeer-review

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

    Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-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

Disease-related mortality (eg, cardiovascular mortality or breast-cancer mortality) is often used as an outcome in randomised clinical trials and systematic reviews. The rationale why disease-related mortality might be used in addition to, or instead of, all-cause mortality seems to be that disease-related mortality may more readily detect the experimental intervention effects. Disease-related mortality is theoretically what most interventions aim at influencing; disease-related intervention effects are not 'diluted' by events unrelated to the disease that may be occurring in both the experimental group and the control group (eg, traffic accidents). Intervention-effect estimates are indeed theoretically diluted and affected if events unrelated to the disease or the trial interventions are occurring. Although sounding attractive, we will in the present paper consider the several methodological limitations of using disease-related mortality instead of all-cause mortality as an outcome. When mortality is a relevant outcome, we recommend using all-cause mortality as a primary outcome and disease-specific mortality as a secondary or exploratory outcome depending on power.

Original languageEnglish
JournalBMJ Evidence-Based Medicine
Volume26
Issue number3
Pages (from-to)127-130
Number of pages4
ISSN1356-5524
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2021

    Research areas

  • STATISTICS & RESEARCH METHODS, RESEARCH METHODS, STATISTICS &amp

ID: 58261780