A Consumer's Guide to Subgroup Analyses
- 1 January 1992
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American College of Physicians in Annals of Internal Medicine
- Vol. 116 (1), 78-84
- https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-116-1-78
Abstract
The extent to which a clinician should believe and act on the results of subgroup analyses of data from randomized trials or meta-analyses is controversial. Guidelines are provided in this paper for making these decisions. The strength of inference regarding a proposed difference in treatment effect among subgroups is dependent on the magnitude of the difference, the statistical significance of the difference, whether the hypothesis preceded or followed the analysis, whether the subgroup analysis was one of a small number of hypotheses tested, whether the difference was suggested by comparisons within or between studies, the consistency of the difference, and the existence of indirect evidence that supports the difference. Application of these guidelines will assist clinicians in making decisions regarding whether to base a treatment decision on overall results or on the results of a subgroup analysis.Keywords
This publication has 32 references indexed in Scilit:
- Evaluating effects of treatment in subgroups of patients within a clinical trial: The case of non-Q-wave myocardial infarction and beta blockersThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1990
- A controlled trial of digoxin in congestive heart failureThe American Journal of Cardiology, 1988
- Statistical Problems in the Reporting of Clinical TrialsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1987
- Beta blockade during and after myocardial infarction: An overview of the randomized trialsProgress in Cardiovascular Diseases, 1985
- Estimating a Population of Parameter Values Using Bayes and Empirical Bayes MethodsJournal of the American Statistical Association, 1984
- Clinical and echocardiographic features of pulmonary valve endocarditis.Circulation, 1982
- Heart Failure in OutpatientsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1982
- A Bayesian approach to the interpretation of subgroup results in clinical trialsJournal of Chronic Diseases, 1982
- A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trialControlled Clinical Trials, 1981
- A Randomized Trial of Aspirin and Sulfinpyrazone in Threatened StrokeNew England Journal of Medicine, 1978