Cited by 710Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Post-randomisation exclusions: the intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis

Open access
Fergusson, Dean, Aaron, Shawn D, Guyatt, Gordon, Hébert, Paul·2002·BMJ

Abstract

When is it legitimate to exclude randomised patients from the analysis of data in clinical trials? Basing their analysis on the desirability of minimising bias and random error, the authors consider the circumstances when it may be possible to exclude patients, even in an intention to treat trial

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.325.7365.652

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 19 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Rubin DB. More powerful randomization-based p-values in double-blind trials with non-compliance. Stat Med 1998;17:371-85.
  2. Pocock SJ, Abdalla M. The hope and the hazards of using compliance data in randomized controlled trials. Stat Med 1998;17:303-17.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fergusson, D., Aaron, S. D., Guyatt, G., & Hébert, P.
Affiliations
McMaster University (CA)
Corresponding author
Fergusson, Dean
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2002-09-21
Volume
325
Issue
7365
Pages
652-654
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2000522086
Cited by
708
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 30 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 59 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 40 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 40 · 2014: 34 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 21
FWCI
17.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DigitalGeorgetown (Georgetown University Library) (submittedVersion)
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, random error, statistical analysis of clinical trials
MeSH terms
Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Patient Selection

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