Logo image
Impact of multiple comparisons in randomized clinical trials
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Impact of multiple comparisons in randomized clinical trials

David Gary Smith, John Clemens, William Crede, Mary Harvey and Edward J Gracely
The American journal of medicine, v 83(3), pp 545-550
1987
PMID: 3661589

Abstract

The randomized clinical trial is the preferred research design for evaluating competing diagnostic and therapeutic alternatives, but confidence in the conclusions from a randomized clinical trial depends on the authors' attention to acknowledged methodologic and statistical standards. This survey assessed the level of attention to the problem of multiple comparisons in the analyses of contemporary randomized clinical trials. Of the 67 trials surveyed, 66 (99 percent) performed multiple comparisons with a mean of 30 therapeutic comparisons per trial. When criteria for statistical impairment were applied, 50 trials (75 percent) had the statistical significance of at least one comparison impaired by the problem of multiple comparisons, and 15 (22 percent) had the statistical significance of all comparisons impaired by the problem of multiple comparisons. Although some statistical techniques are available, there still exists a great need for future work to clarify further the problem of multiple comparisons and determine how the impact of this problem can best be minimized in subsequent research.

Metrics

14 Record Views
70 citations in Scopus
28 readers on Mendeley

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This publication has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#3 Good Health and Well-Being

InCites Highlights

Data related to this publication, from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool:

Collaboration types
Domestic collaboration
Web of Science research areas
Medicine, General & Internal
Logo image