Cargando…

Intent-to-Treat (ITT) vs Completer or Per-Protocol Analysis in Randomized Controlled Trials

In randomized controlled trials, randomization creates groups that are reasonably well balanced on all baseline variables, whether measured, unmeasured, or unknown. Postbaseline events disturb this balance, resulting in postrandomization biases. Drop-out is one such event. There are two main methods...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Andrade, Chittaranjan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9301744/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35949630
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02537176221101996
_version_ 1784751485602496512
author Andrade, Chittaranjan
author_facet Andrade, Chittaranjan
author_sort Andrade, Chittaranjan
collection PubMed
description In randomized controlled trials, randomization creates groups that are reasonably well balanced on all baseline variables, whether measured, unmeasured, or unknown. Postbaseline events disturb this balance, resulting in postrandomization biases. Drop-out is one such event. There are two main methods for data analysis when there are dropouts. One method is to analyze data from only those who complete the study (completer analysis), or only those who complete the study and also comply with all its key elements (per-protocol analysis, a special type of completer analysis). The other method is to analyze the data from all randomized patients, regardless of dropout (intent-to-treat [ITT] analysis), or all randomized patients who meet an additional criterion, such as taking at least one dose of study drug (modified ITT [mITT] analysis, a special type of ITT analysis). Completer analyses present results in the ideal situation in which patients take medications as advised. ITT analyses present results related to real-world practice, where patients may be irregular with dosing or stop taking medications. The advantages and disadvantages of each type of analysis are discussed. The handling of missing data in ITT and mITT analysis is also briefly discussed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9301744
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93017442022-08-09 Intent-to-Treat (ITT) vs Completer or Per-Protocol Analysis in Randomized Controlled Trials Andrade, Chittaranjan Indian J Psychol Med Learning Curve In randomized controlled trials, randomization creates groups that are reasonably well balanced on all baseline variables, whether measured, unmeasured, or unknown. Postbaseline events disturb this balance, resulting in postrandomization biases. Drop-out is one such event. There are two main methods for data analysis when there are dropouts. One method is to analyze data from only those who complete the study (completer analysis), or only those who complete the study and also comply with all its key elements (per-protocol analysis, a special type of completer analysis). The other method is to analyze the data from all randomized patients, regardless of dropout (intent-to-treat [ITT] analysis), or all randomized patients who meet an additional criterion, such as taking at least one dose of study drug (modified ITT [mITT] analysis, a special type of ITT analysis). Completer analyses present results in the ideal situation in which patients take medications as advised. ITT analyses present results related to real-world practice, where patients may be irregular with dosing or stop taking medications. The advantages and disadvantages of each type of analysis are discussed. The handling of missing data in ITT and mITT analysis is also briefly discussed. SAGE Publications 2022-06-21 2022-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9301744/ /pubmed/35949630 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02537176221101996 Text en © 2022 Indian Psychiatric Society - South Zonal Branch https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Learning Curve
Andrade, Chittaranjan
Intent-to-Treat (ITT) vs Completer or Per-Protocol Analysis in Randomized Controlled Trials
title Intent-to-Treat (ITT) vs Completer or Per-Protocol Analysis in Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full Intent-to-Treat (ITT) vs Completer or Per-Protocol Analysis in Randomized Controlled Trials
title_fullStr Intent-to-Treat (ITT) vs Completer or Per-Protocol Analysis in Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full_unstemmed Intent-to-Treat (ITT) vs Completer or Per-Protocol Analysis in Randomized Controlled Trials
title_short Intent-to-Treat (ITT) vs Completer or Per-Protocol Analysis in Randomized Controlled Trials
title_sort intent-to-treat (itt) vs completer or per-protocol analysis in randomized controlled trials
topic Learning Curve
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9301744/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35949630
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/02537176221101996
work_keys_str_mv AT andradechittaranjan intenttotreatittvscompleterorperprotocolanalysisinrandomizedcontrolledtrials