The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Intention-to-Treat Analysis: Implications for Quantitative and Qualitative Research
Open accessAbstract
Newell D J (Department of Medical Statistics, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, UK). Intention-to-treat analysis: implications for quantitative and qualitative research. International Journal of Epidemiology 1992, 21: 837–841 Intention-to-treat analysis is an important aspect of randomized controlled trials of health care interventions. The concept is now widely accepted in theory, but not always implemented in practice. Failure to analyse by intention-to-treat can give misleading and indeed life-threatening interpretations. In some studies, a case is put for estimating the effect that would have been observed if all patients had received the allocated treatment. Situations where this is valid are rare, but an example is given of such an exceptional study. The relevance of the intention-to-treat concept is not always taken into account in qualitative research. Interviews with new mothers who delivered their babies at home in a hypothetical controlled trial of home versus hospital confinement would provide fascinating accounts of the pleasures of successful delivery at home. But by definition the interviews would exclude the hazard and drama of necessary transfers to hospital due to complications in late pregnancy and early labour. The intention-to-treat approach would avoid this bias.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
In the citing paper
“All enrolled participants who completed the baseline assessment were included in the intention-to-treat analysis [31].”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Explanatory and Pragmatic Attitudes in Therapeutical Trials
Schwartz, D., & Lellouch, J. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.01.012 · Cited by 1,253
On estimating efficacy from clinical trials
Sommer, A. H., & Zeger, S. L. (1991) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780100110 · Cited by 325
Analysis of clinical trials by treatment actually received: Is it really an option?
Lee, Y. J., Ellenberg, J. H., Hirtz, D. G., & Nelson, K. B. (1991) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.4780101011 · Cited by 281
Interim Analyses for Randomized Clinical Trials: The Group Sequential Approach
Pocock, S. (1982) · Biometrics · doi:10.2307/2530298 · Cited by 265
CORONARY-ARTERY BYPASS SURGERY IN STABLE ANGINA PECTORIS: SURVIVAL AT TWO YEARS
(1979) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(79)91372-2 · Cited by 103
A controlled study of the effect of temperature on premature babies
Jolly, H. P., Molyneux, P., & NEWELL, D. J. (1962) · The Journal of Pediatrics · doi:10.1016/s0022-3476(62)80174-7 · Cited by 67
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Schwartz D, Flamant R, LeUouch i. Clinical Trials. London: Academic Press, 1980.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
(2008) · Cited by 3,790
Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies
Higgins, J. P., & Altman, D. G. (2008) · Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions · doi:10.1002/9780470712184.ch8 · Cited by 3,396
Dawson‐Hughes, B., Harris, S. S., Krall, E. A., & Dallal, G. E. (1997) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejm199709043371003 · Cited by 2,276
What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials
Hollis, S., & Campbell, F. (1999) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.319.7211.670 · Cited by 2,160
Intention-to-treat concept: A review
Gupta, S. (2011) · Perspectives in Clinical Research · doi:10.4103/2229-3485.83221 · Cited by 1,921
“[2-5] ITT analysis is usually described as “once randomized, always analyzed”.”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- NEWELL, D. J.
- Affiliations
- Newcastle University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- NEWELL, DAVID J
- ORCID
- NEWELL, DAVID J
- Venue
- International Journal of Epidemiology
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1992
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 837-841
- ISSN
- 0300-5771 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3685
- OpenAlex
- W2106051200
- Cited by
- 715
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 35 · 2014: 51 · 2013: 62 · 2012: 34
- FWCI
- 5.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- International Journal of Epidemiology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Advanced Causal Inference Techniques
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- intention-to-treat analysis, randomized controlled trials, health interventions, qualitative research, home birth, hospital confinement, allocation bias, treatment effect estimation
- MeSH terms
- Data Interpretation, Statistical, Evaluation Studies as Topic, Humans, Patient Compliance, Random Allocation, Research Design, Therapeutics, Cohort Studies, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
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
