Cited by 184Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsStatistical Methods and Bayesian Inference

Clinical trials with multiple outcomes: a statistical perspective on their design, analysis, and interpretation

Pocock, Stuart J.·1997·Controlled Clinical Trials

Abstract

This article tackles both practical and statistical issues in the handling of multiple outcomes in clinical trials, with relevance to trial design, analysis, and reporting. Specific topics illustrated by examples include: the advantage of prespecifying priorities amongst outcomes and analyses, corrections for multiple significance testing and their limited value, problems with adverse event data, the use of a single global test of significance for clinically related outcomes, the use of a combined outcome for clinical event data, and the value of exploring interrelationships amongst outcomes. The problems in handling multiple outcomes are enhanced by trials being too small, dichotomous attitudes (is the trial "positive" or not?), obsession with p-values, and the manipulative instincts of human nature. While predeclarations of priorities in analysis and reporting of multiple outcomes are important in suppressing distortive claims, it would be unfortunate if too inflexible an approach suppressed unpredictable findings from being seriously considered.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0197-2456(97)00008-1

Cites

16 of 16 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Clinical trial design parameters strongly influence data outcome, interpretation, and conclusions.

    “It is very important to emphasize that clinical trial design parameters strongly influence data outcome, interpretation, and conclusions [267, 268].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pocock, S. J.
Affiliations
London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (GB)
Corresponding author
Pocock, Stuart J.
Venue
Controlled Clinical Trials
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1997-12
Volume
18
Issue
6
Pages
530-545
ISSN
0197-2456 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2021056870
Cited by
184
References
16
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 14 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 8
FWCI
2.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Controlled Clinical Trials (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods and Bayesian Inference
Keywords
multiple outcomes, clinical trial design, outcome prioritization, trial reporting, p-values, trial size
MeSH terms
Clinical Trials as Topic, Coronary Disease, Humans, Research Design, Cluster Analysis, Outcome Assessment, Health Care

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review