Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1/1819
Title: Bias and Loss to Follow-Up in Cardiovascular Randomized Trials: A Systematic Review
Authors: Ford, Tom ;Fong, L.C.W.;da Costa, B.R.;Juni, P.;Berry, C.
Affliation: Central Coast Local Health District
Gosford Hospital
The University of Newcastle
Issue Date: Jul-2020
Source: 9(14):e015361
Journal title: Journal of the American Heart Association
Department: Cardiology
Abstract: Background Loss to follow-up (LTFU) is common in randomized controlled trials. However, its potential impact on primary outcomes from cardiovascular randomized controlled trials is not known. Methods and Results We conducted a prospective systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42019121959) for randomized controlled trials published in 8 leading journals over 5¬†years from January 2014 to December 2018. Extent, reporting, and handling of LTFU data were recorded, and the proportion of a trial's primary outcome results that lose statistical significance was calculated after making plausible assumptions for the intervention and control arms. These assumptions could drive differential treatment effects between the groups considering relative event incidence between LTFU participants and those included in the primary outcome. We identified 117 randomized controlled trials of which 91 (78%) trials reported LTFU, 23 (20%) reported no LTFU, and 3 (3%) trials did not report on whether LTFU occurred. The median percentage of study participants lost to follow-up was 2% (interquartile range, 0.33%-5.3%). Only 10 trials (9%) had a low cluster of risk factors for impairment in trial quality. The percentage of trials losing statistical significance varied from 2% when the relative event incidence for LTFU between the randomized groups was 1 for the intervention arm and 1.5 for the control arm to 16% when the relative event incidence was 3 for the intervention arm and 1 for the control arm. Conclusions Almost 1 in 6 (16%) cardiovascular randomized trials published in leading journals may have a change in the primary outcome if plausible assumptions are made about differential event rates of participants lost to follow up. There is scope for improvement arising from LTFU in randomized trials in cardiovascular medicine. Registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42019121959.
URI: https://elibrary.cclhd.health.nsw.gov.au/cclhdjspui/handle/1/1819
DOI: 10.1161/jaha.119.015361
Pubmed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32646264/
ISSN: 2047-9980
Publicaton type: Journal Article
Keywords: Cardiology
Heart Disease
Study or Trial: Systematic Reviews
Appears in Collections:Cardiology

Show full item record

Page view(s)

24
checked on Jan 31, 2023

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.