corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 18603

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Lerche la Cour J, Brok J, Gøtzsche PC
Inconsistent reporting of surrogate outcomes in randomised clinical trials: cohort study
BMJ 2010 Aug 18; 341:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/341/aug18_3/c3653


Abstract:

Objective To assess if authors of randomised clinical trials convey the fact that they have used surrogate outcomes and discussed their validity.
Design Cohort study.

Setting Six major general medical journals.

Participants Randomised clinical trials published in 2005 and 2006 that used a surrogate as a primary outcome.

Results Of 626 published randomised clinical trials, 109 (17%) used a surrogate as a primary outcome. Of these trials, 62 (57%, 95% confidence interval 47% to 67%) clearly reported that the primary outcome was a surrogate. Only 38 (35%, 26% to 45%) also discussed the validity of the surrogate.

Conclusion Only about one third of authors of randomised clinical trials that used a surrogate as a primary outcome reported adequately on the surrogate. Better reporting is needed.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








As an advertising man, I can assure you that advertising which does not work does not continue to run. If experience did not show beyond doubt that the great majority of doctors are splendidly responsive to current [prescription drug] advertising, new techniques would be devised in short order. And if, indeed, candor, accuracy, scientific completeness, and a permanent ban on cartoons came to be essential for the successful promotion of [prescription] drugs, advertising would have no choice but to comply.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963