Research
Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: systematic review
BMJ 2012; 344 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.e1553 (Published 15 March 2012) Cite this as: BMJ 2012;344:e1553
Data supplement
Web Extra
Extra material supplied by the author
Files in this Data Supplement:
- Data Supplement - Appendix 1: approaches to selecting the primary outcome
- Data Supplement - Appendix 2: selection of pairwise comparisons
- Data Supplement - Appendix 3: criteria for judging the strength of a subgroup claim
Related articles
- Research Methods & Reporting Published: 24 March 2010; BMJ 340 doi:10.1136/bmj.c332
- Research Published: 28 March 2011; BMJ 342 doi:10.1136/bmj.d1569
- Education And Debate Published: 25 January 2003; BMJ 326 doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7382.219
- Research Methods & Reporting Published: 30 March 2010; BMJ 340 doi:10.1136/bmj.c117
- Practice Published: 12 July 2007; BMJ 335 doi:10.1136/bmj.39265.596262.AD
- Research Published: 26 February 2013; BMJ 346 doi:10.1136/bmj.f540
- Research Published: 01 July 2014; BMJ 349 doi:10.1136/bmj.g4145
- Research Published: 16 February 2015; BMJ 350 doi:10.1136/bmj.h638
- Research Methods & Reporting Published: 04 November 2015; BMJ 351 doi:10.1136/bmj.h5651
- Research Published: 24 November 2016; BMJ 355 doi:10.1136/bmj.i5826
- Clinical Review Published: 10 December 2018; BMJ 363 doi:10.1136/bmj.k4245
EditorialSubgroup analyses
See more
- Chemoprevention of colorectal cancer in individuals with previous colorectal neoplasia: systematic review and network meta-analysisBMJ December 05, 2016, 355 i6188; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6188
- NHS to fund large trial of pre-exposure prophylaxis for HIV preventionBMJ December 05, 2016, 355 i6537; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6537
- Bill to boost medical research funding and speed drug approval passes US houseBMJ December 01, 2016, 355 i6498; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6498
- Alpha blockers for treatment of ureteric stones: systematic review and meta-analysisBMJ December 01, 2016, 355 i6112; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6112
- Sixty seconds on . . . solanezumabBMJ November 29, 2016, 355 i6389; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i6389
Cited by...
- Towards consensus in defining and handling contextual factors within rheumatology trials: an initial qualitative study from an OMERACT working group
- Reporting of methodological studies in health research: a protocol for the development of the MethodologIcal STudy reportIng Checklist (MISTIC)
- Development of the Instrument to assess the Credibility of Effect Modification Analyses (ICEMAN) in randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses
- Characteristics and interpretation of subgroup analyses based on tumour characteristics in randomised trials testing target-specific anticancer drugs: design of a systematic survey
- Guidance from key organisations on exploring, confirming and interpreting subgroup effects of medical treatments: a scoping review
- Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 inhibitors in reducing cardiovascular outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Impact of mobile health applications on self-management in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: protocol of a systematic review
- Personalized evidence based medicine: predictive approaches to heterogeneous treatment effects
- Meta-analysis: mistake or milestone in medicine?
- Oral diabetes medication monotherapy and short-term mortality in individuals with type 2 diabetes and coronary artery disease
- Preparing for what the reporting checklists will not tell you: the PREPARE Trial guide for planning clinical research to avoid research waste
- Presentation approaches for enhancing interpretability of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in meta-analysis: a protocol for a systematic survey of Cochrane reviews
- When is a randomised controlled trial health equity relevant? Development and validation of a conceptual framework
- Corticosteroids in sepsis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis (protocol)
- Sex based subgroup differences in randomized controlled trials: empirical evidence from Cochrane meta-analyses
- Lessons Learned from EVOLVE for Planning of Future Randomized Trials in Patients on Dialysis
- Reply to M. Di Maio and F. Perrone
- Three simple rules to ensure reasonably credible subgroup analyses
- From Protocols to Publications: A Study in Selective Reporting of Outcomes in Randomized Trials in Oncology
- Subgroup Analyses in Reporting of Phase III Clinical Trials in Solid Tumors
- The Effects of Cinacalcet in Older and Younger Patients on Hemodialysis: The Evaluation of Cinacalcet HCl Therapy to Lower Cardiovascular Events (EVOLVE) Trial
- Integrated primary care for patients with mental and physical multimorbidity: cluster randomised controlled trial of collaborative care for patients with depression comorbid with diabetes or cardiovascular disease
- The effectiveness of self-management support interventions for men with long-term conditions: a systematic review and meta-analysis
- Meta-analysis for orthodontists: Part II - Is all that glitters gold?
- Impact of peer review on reports of randomised trials published in open peer review journals: retrospective before and after study
- Moderators of remission with interpersonal counselling or drug treatment in primary care patients with depression: randomised controlled trial
- Influence of initial severity of depression on effectiveness of low intensity interventions: meta-analysis of individual patient data
- Determinants of success of quality improvement collaboratives: what does the literature show?
- Subgroup Analyses in Nephrology Clinical Trials
- Subgroup analyses