What differences are detected by superiority trials or ruled out by noninferiority trials? A cross-sectional study on a random sample of two-hundred two-arms parallel group randomized clinical trials
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND The smallest difference to be detected in superiority trials or the largest difference to be ruled out in noninferiority trials is a key determinant of sample size, but little guidance exists to help researchers in their choice. The objectives were to examine the distribution of differences that researchers aim to detect in clinical trials and to verify that those differences are smaller in noninferiority compared to superiority trials. METHODS Cross-sectional study based on a random sample of two hundred two-arm, parallel group superiority (100) and noninferiority (100) randomized clinical trials published between 2004 and 2009 in 27 leading medical journals. The main outcome measure was the smallest difference in favor of the new treatment to be detected (superiority trials) or largest unfavorable difference to be ruled out (noninferiority trials) used for sample size computation, expressed as standardized difference in proportions, or standardized difference in means. Student t test and analysis of variance were used. RESULTS The differences to be detected or ruled out varied considerably from one study to the next; e.g., for superiority trials, the standardized difference in means ranged from 0.007 to 0.87, and the standardized difference in proportions from 0.04 to 1.56. On average, superiority trials were designed to detect larger differences than noninferiority trials (standardized difference in proportions: mean 0.37 versus 0.27, P = 0.001; standardized difference in means: 0.56 versus 0.40, P = 0.006). Standardized differences were lower for mortality than for other outcomes, and lower in cardiovascular trials than in other research areas. CONCLUSIONS Superiority trials are designed to detect larger differences than noninferiority trials are designed to rule out. The variability between studies is considerable and is partly explained by the type of outcome and the medical context. A more explicit and rational approach to choosing the difference to be detected or to be ruled out in clinical trials may be desirable.
منابع مشابه
Blindness in Randomized Controlled Trials
In combination with randomization, blinding or masking is an important factor in randomized controlled trials (RCTs), particularly in trials that assess therapeutic effects. Here an attempt is made to explain blindness and why it is important. In clinical trials, blinding is defined as the condition imposed on a study in which study participants, health care providers and assessors collecting o...
متن کاملEffects of L-citrulline supplementation on blood pressure: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Objective: We aimed to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials that examined the effects of L-citrulline supplementation on blood pressure (BP). Materials and Methods: We searched MEDLINE, SCOPUS, PUBMED and Google scholar databases from inception to November 16, 2017 and 811 papers were identified, of which 8 trials with 10 data sets met the inclusion criteria. Inclus...
متن کاملبررسی شیوه کورسازی، نوع مداخله و حوزههای موضوعی در کارآزماییهای بالینی تصادفی کنترل شده
Background and Aim: Randomized controlled clinical trial is the most valid type of epidemiological studies for the treatment of diseases. The aim of the present article is to determine the subject area, type of intervention, and blinding methods used in this type of study design. Materials and Methods: This is a cross-sectional descriptive study in which all the articles based on randomized c...
متن کاملBroccoli and Helicobacter Pylori: A Systematic Review
Objective Pharmacological treatment of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) infection is based on the use of at least two antibiotics with a double dose of proton pump inhibitor which results in antibiotic resistance. Anti-helicobacterial activity of sulforaphane-rich broccoli has been evaluated in laboratory studies. This study aimed to systematically review the conducted randomized clinical trials...
متن کاملComparing the Efficacy of Propranolol+ Cinarizine and Propranolol+Placebo in Controlling Pediatric Migraine Headaches: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Background and purpose: Numerous drugs have been suggested to control pediatric migraine headaches, but there are limited numbers of randomized controlled trials to prove their efficacy. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of Propranolol + Cinnarizine and Propranolol + placebo in controlling migraine headaches in Children. Materials and methods: A double-blind, placebo-controlled...
متن کامل