Treating individuals 2. Subgroup analysis in randomised controlled trials: importance, indications, and interpretation.

By Peter M. Rothwell. 2005

968 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Estimating treatment effect heterogeneity in randomized program evaluation (2013, methodology): “However, the most commonly used method, subgroup analysis, is often inappropriate and remains one of the most debated practices in the medical research community [e.g., Rothwell (2005), Lagakos (2006)].”
Modeling heterogeneous treatment effects in large-scale experiments using Bayesian Additive Regression Trees (2010, background): “…heterogeneity in statistics (e.g., Byar 1985; Dixon and Simon 1991; Follman and Proschan 1999; Pocock et al. 2002; Royston and Sauerbrei 2004; Rothwell 2005) and econometrics (e.g., Heckman, Smith, and Clements 1997; Abadie 2003; Poirier and Tobias 2003; Angrist 2004; Dehejia 2005; Bitler,…”
Subgroup Identification and Variable Selection from Randomized Clinical Trial Data. (2013, background): “A well-known risk in subgroup analysis is that of false positives [Yusuf et al., 1991, Peto et al., 1995, Assmann et al., 2000, Brookes et al., 2001, Cui et al., 2002, Pocock et al., 2002, Brookes et al., 2004, Rothwell, 2005, Lagakos, 2006, Wang et al., 2007].”
The role of aspirin dose on the prevention of preeclampsia and fetal growth restriction: systematic review and meta‐analysis (2017, unknown): “It could be argued that the use of subgroups (several dosages, several gestational ages) and multiple analyses could lead to potential biases.(105) An additional limitation is that we are unable to determine the optimal dose of aspirin based on this meta-regression analysis, as the number of partici”
Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. (2005, background): “…from randomized controlled clinical trials may be more limited than is generally thought, even apart from the issue of comorbidity (Kravitz, Duan, and Braslow 2004; Rothwell 2005), particularly when considering the issue of disease-specific versus overall clinical end points (Fleming 2005).”
Universal Interventions: Fully Exploring Their Impacts and Potential to Produce Population-Level Impacts (2017, background): “Because of these concerns, it has been suggested that researchers clearly differentiate between exploratory versus confirmatory analyses when conducting and reporting subgroup analyses in RCTs (Bloom & Michalopoulos, 2013; Rothwell, 2005).”