Missing Outcome Data in Recent Perinatal and Neonatal Clinical Trials

Author:

Li Guowei12,Liu Yingxin1,Zhang Jingyi1,DeMauro Sara B.34,Meng Qiong5,Mbuagbaw Lawrence2678910,Schmidt Barbara46,Kirpalani Haresh1112,Thabane Lehana261013

Affiliation:

1. aCenter for Clinical Epidemiology and Methodology

2. bFather Sean O’Sullivan Research Centre, St Joseph’s Healthcare Hamilton, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

3. cDivision of Neonatology, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia

4. dDepartment of Pediatrics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

5. eDepartment of Pediatrics, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, Guangzhou, China

6. fEvidence, and Impact; Department of Health Research Methods

7. gAnesthesia

8. hPediatrics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

9. iCentre for Development of Best Practices in Health, Yaoundé Central Hospital, Yaoundé, Cameroon, Central Africa

10. jDivision of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University, Cape Town, South Africa

11. kEmeritus Professor Pediatrics at University Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA

12. lEmeritus Professor Pediatrics McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada

13. mUniversity of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa

Abstract

Missing outcome data in clinical trials may jeopardize the validity of the trial results and inferences for clinical practice. Although sick and preterm newborns are treated as a captive patient population during their stay in the NICUs, their long-term outcomes are often ascertained after discharge. This greatly increases the risk of attrition. We surveyed recently published perinatal and neonatal randomized trials in 7 high-impact general medical and pediatric journals to review the handling of missing primary outcome data and any choice of imputation methods. Of 87 eligible trials in this survey, 77 (89%) had incomplete primary outcome data. The missing outcome data were not discussed at all in 9 reports (12%). Most study teams restricted their main analysis to participants with complete information for the primary outcome (61 trials; 79%). Only 38 of the 77 teams (49%) performed sensitivity analyses using a variety of imputation methods. We conclude that the handling of missing primary outcome data was frequently inadequate in recent randomized perinatal and neonatal trials. To improve future approaches to missing outcome data, we discuss the strengths and limitations of different imputation methods, the appropriate estimation of sample size, and how to deal with data withdrawal. However, the best strategy to reduce bias from missing outcome data in perinatal and neonatal trials remains prevention. Investigators should anticipate and preempt missing data through careful study design, and closely monitor all incoming primary outcome data for completeness during the conduct of the trial.

Publisher

American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Making the Most of Missing Data;Pediatrics;2024-02-23

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3