Influence of attrition, missing data, compliance, and related biases and analyses strategies on treatment effects in randomized controlled trials in rehabilitation: a methodological review

被引:10
作者
Armijo-Olivo, Susan [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Machalicek, Wendy [4 ]
Dennett, Liz [5 ]
Ballenberger, Nikolaus [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Appl Sci, Fac Business & Social Sci, Caprivistr 30A, D-49076 Osnabruck, Germany
[2] Rehabil Res Ctr, Fac Rehabil Med, Dept Phys Therapy, Edmonton, AB, Canada
[3] IRCCS Fdn Don Carlo Gnocchi, Cochrane Rehabil, Milan, Italy
[4] Univ Oregon, Coll Educ, Fac Special Educ & Clin Sci, Eugene, OR 97403 USA
[5] Univ Alberta, Scott Hlth Sci Lib, Edmonton, AB, Canada
关键词
Compliance; Bias; Rehabilitation; Randomized controlled trials; Systematic review; INTENTION-TO-TREAT; INTERVENTION; PARTICIPANTS; ADHERENCE;
D O I
10.23736/S1973-9087.20.06428-X
中图分类号
R49 [康复医学];
学科分类号
100215 ;
摘要
INTRODUCTION: Attrition, missing data, compliance, and related biases are three interrelated concepts. Previous research has found that these biases can affect the treatment estimates of randomized trials (RCTs). The extent to which the effects of attrition, missing data, compliance and related biases influence effect size estimates in rehabilitation as well as the effect of analytic strategies to mitigate these biases is unknown. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: To compile and synthetize the empirical evidence regarding the effects of attrition and compliance related biases on treatment effect estimates in rehabilitation RCTs. Electronic searches were conducted. Studies were included if they investigated the effects of attrition, missing data, compliance and related biases on treatment estimates. The seven studies meeting inclusion criteria were coded for type of biases and summarized using a narrative and/or quantitative approach when appropriate. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Findings demonstrated that trials reporting higher levels of attrition (differences in ES: 0.18 [95%CI: 0.15, 0.22]), exclusion of participants from analyses (differences in ES: 0.13 [95% CI: -0.03, 0.29]), lack of good control of incomplete outcome data (differences in ES: 0.14 [95%CI: -0.02, 0.30]) and analysis by "as treated"(differences in ES:-0.39 [95%CI: -0.99, 0.2]) or "per protocol" (differences in ES:-0.46 [95%CI: -0.92, 0]) analyses were more likely to have higher effects than those that did not. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that attrition, missing data, compliance, and related biases have an influence in treatment effect estimates in rehabilitation trials. Therefore, these results should be taken into consideration when designing, conducting and reporting trials in the rehabilitation field.
引用
收藏
页码:799 / 816
页数:18
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]   Deviation from intention to treat analysis in randomised trials and treatment effect estimates: meta-epidemiological study [J].
Abraha, Iosief ;
Cherubini, Antonio ;
Cozzolino, Francesco ;
De Florio, Rita ;
Luchetta, Maria Laura ;
Rimland, Joseph M. ;
Folletti, Ilenia ;
Marchesi, Mauro ;
Germani, Antonella ;
Orso, Massimiliano ;
Eusebi, Paolo ;
Montedori, Alessandro .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2015, 350
[2]   Modified intention to treat reporting in randomised controlled trials: systematic review [J].
Abraha, Iosief ;
Montedori, Alessandro .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2010, 340 :33
[3]   Potential impact on estimated treatment effects of information lost to follow-up in randomised controlled trials (LOST-IT): systematic review [J].
Akl, Elie A. ;
Briel, Matthias ;
You, John J. ;
Sun, Xin ;
Johnston, Bradley C. ;
Busse, Jason W. ;
Mulla, Sohail ;
Lamontagne, Francois ;
Bassler, Dirk ;
Vera, Claudio ;
Alshurafa, Mohamad ;
Katsios, Christina M. ;
Zhou, Qi ;
Cukierman-Yaffe, Tali ;
Gangji, Azim ;
Mills, Edward J. ;
Walter, Stephen D. ;
Cook, Deborah J. ;
Schuenemann, Holger J. ;
Altman, Douglas G. ;
Guyatt, Gordon H. .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2012, 344 :e2809
[4]   Inconsistent Definitions for Intention-To-Treat in Relation to Missing Outcome Data: Systematic Review of the Methods Literature [J].
Alshurafa, Mohamad ;
Briel, Matthias ;
Akl, Elie A. ;
Haines, Ted ;
Moayyedi, Paul ;
Gentles, Stephen J. ;
Rios, Lorena ;
Tran, Chau ;
Bhatnagar, Neera ;
Lamontagne, Francois ;
Walter, Stephen D. ;
Guyatt, Gordon H. .
PLOS ONE, 2012, 7 (11)
[5]  
[Anonymous], Prediction intervals
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2012, Detection of Associations Between Trial Quality and Effect Sizes
[7]   Enrolling and keeping participants in multiple sclerosis self-management interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis [J].
Arafah, Alaa M. ;
Bouchard, Vanessa ;
Mayo, Nancy E. .
CLINICAL REHABILITATION, 2017, 31 (06) :809-823
[8]  
Armijo-Olivo S, 2020, EUR J PHYS REHABIL M
[9]   How to perform a meta-analysis with R: a practical tutorial [J].
Balduzzi, Sara ;
Ruecker, Gerta ;
Schwarzer, Guido .
EVIDENCE-BASED MENTAL HEALTH, 2019, 22 (04) :153-160
[10]   Differential dropout and bias in randomised controlled trials: when it matters and when it may not [J].
Bell, Melanie L. ;
Kenward, Michael G. ;
Fairclough, Diane L. ;
Horton, Nicholas J. .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2013, 346