Cargando…

Statistical Fragility of Surgical and Procedural Clinical Trials in Orthopaedic Oncology

The fragility index (FI) is a powerful tool that can be used to assess the statistical strength of a study outcome. This metric is defined as the number of patients who would need to have an alternative outcome to convert a clinical trial result from statistically significant to not statistically si...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Forrester, Lynn Ann, Jang, Eugene, Lawson, Michelle M., Capi, Ana, Tyler, Wakenda K.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7322779/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32656478
http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-19-00152
_version_ 1783551706744750080
author Forrester, Lynn Ann
Jang, Eugene
Lawson, Michelle M.
Capi, Ana
Tyler, Wakenda K.
author_facet Forrester, Lynn Ann
Jang, Eugene
Lawson, Michelle M.
Capi, Ana
Tyler, Wakenda K.
author_sort Forrester, Lynn Ann
collection PubMed
description The fragility index (FI) is a powerful tool that can be used to assess the statistical strength of a study outcome. This metric is defined as the number of patients who would need to have an alternative outcome to convert a clinical trial result from statistically significant to not statistically significant, or vice versa. No studies to date have used the FI to evaluate surgical and procedural clinical trials in the orthopaedic oncology literature. The primary purpose of this study was to use the FI to evaluate the statistical strength of widely cited surgical and procedural clinical trials in orthopaedic oncology. METHODS: We performed a PubMed search for orthopaedic oncology clinical trials in high impact orthopaedics–focused, oncology-focused, and general medicine journals. For each study included in this analysis, we calculated the FI for all identified dichotomous, categorical outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 23 studies with 48 outcomes. Twelve of these outcomes were statistically significant, with a median FI of two. Nine studies addressed the number of patients lost to follow up, and the FI was less than the number of patients lost to follow up for most outcomes (60%) in these studies. CONCLUSIONS: The orthopaedic oncology literature has substantial statistical fragility, likely explained by a high number of patients lost to follow up and small sample sizes. More multicenter, cooperative studies are necessary to increases the robustness of clinical research in orthopaedic oncology.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7322779
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73227792020-07-09 Statistical Fragility of Surgical and Procedural Clinical Trials in Orthopaedic Oncology Forrester, Lynn Ann Jang, Eugene Lawson, Michelle M. Capi, Ana Tyler, Wakenda K. J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev Research Article The fragility index (FI) is a powerful tool that can be used to assess the statistical strength of a study outcome. This metric is defined as the number of patients who would need to have an alternative outcome to convert a clinical trial result from statistically significant to not statistically significant, or vice versa. No studies to date have used the FI to evaluate surgical and procedural clinical trials in the orthopaedic oncology literature. The primary purpose of this study was to use the FI to evaluate the statistical strength of widely cited surgical and procedural clinical trials in orthopaedic oncology. METHODS: We performed a PubMed search for orthopaedic oncology clinical trials in high impact orthopaedics–focused, oncology-focused, and general medicine journals. For each study included in this analysis, we calculated the FI for all identified dichotomous, categorical outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 23 studies with 48 outcomes. Twelve of these outcomes were statistically significant, with a median FI of two. Nine studies addressed the number of patients lost to follow up, and the FI was less than the number of patients lost to follow up for most outcomes (60%) in these studies. CONCLUSIONS: The orthopaedic oncology literature has substantial statistical fragility, likely explained by a high number of patients lost to follow up and small sample sizes. More multicenter, cooperative studies are necessary to increases the robustness of clinical research in orthopaedic oncology. Wolters Kluwer 2020-06-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7322779/ /pubmed/32656478 http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-19-00152 Text en Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Forrester, Lynn Ann
Jang, Eugene
Lawson, Michelle M.
Capi, Ana
Tyler, Wakenda K.
Statistical Fragility of Surgical and Procedural Clinical Trials in Orthopaedic Oncology
title Statistical Fragility of Surgical and Procedural Clinical Trials in Orthopaedic Oncology
title_full Statistical Fragility of Surgical and Procedural Clinical Trials in Orthopaedic Oncology
title_fullStr Statistical Fragility of Surgical and Procedural Clinical Trials in Orthopaedic Oncology
title_full_unstemmed Statistical Fragility of Surgical and Procedural Clinical Trials in Orthopaedic Oncology
title_short Statistical Fragility of Surgical and Procedural Clinical Trials in Orthopaedic Oncology
title_sort statistical fragility of surgical and procedural clinical trials in orthopaedic oncology
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7322779/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32656478
http://dx.doi.org/10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-19-00152
work_keys_str_mv AT forresterlynnann statisticalfragilityofsurgicalandproceduralclinicaltrialsinorthopaediconcology
AT jangeugene statisticalfragilityofsurgicalandproceduralclinicaltrialsinorthopaediconcology
AT lawsonmichellem statisticalfragilityofsurgicalandproceduralclinicaltrialsinorthopaediconcology
AT capiana statisticalfragilityofsurgicalandproceduralclinicaltrialsinorthopaediconcology
AT tylerwakendak statisticalfragilityofsurgicalandproceduralclinicaltrialsinorthopaediconcology