CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 176

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

An IV for the RCT: using instrumental variables to adjust for treatment contamination in randomised controlled trials

Sussman, J. B., Hayward, R. A.·2010·BMJ
DOI 10.1136/bmj.c2073PMC PMC3230230
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/bmj.c2073

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

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.

Citations

Cites

  • A meta-analysis of the association between adherence to drug therapy and mortality

    Simpson, S. H., Eurich, D. T., Majumdar, S. R., Padwal, R. S., Tsuyuki, R. T., Varney, J., & Johnson, J. A. (2006) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.38875.675486.55 · Cited by 1,353 · cited 1×

    “In as treated analyses, participants are analysed entirely on the basis of treatment received (that is, according to their behaviour, not their random assignment). In per protocol analyses, participants who fail to follow the protocol are simply dropped from the study (that is, included or excluded according to their…”

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 36

  1. [1]Schroder FH, Hugosson J, Roobol MJ, Tammela TL, Ciatto S, Nelen V, et al. Screening and prostate-cancer mortality in a randomized European study. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1320-8. 19297566
  2. [2]Andriole GL, Crawford ED, Grubb RL 3rd, Buys SS, Chia D, Church TR, et al. Mortality results from a randomized prostate-cancer screening trial. N Engl J Med 2009; 360: 1310-9. 19297565 PMC2944770
  3. [3]Calverley PM, Anderson JA, Celli B, Ferguson GT, Jenkins C, Jones PW, et al. Salmeterol and fluticasone propionate and survival in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 775-89. 17314337
  4. [4]Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, Hanscom B, Tosteson AN, Blood EA, et al. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 2257-70. 17538085 PMC2553804
  5. [5]Packer M, Fowler MB, Roecker EB, Coats AJ, Katus HA, Krum H, et al. Effect of carvedilol on the morbidity of patients with severe chronic heart failure: results of the carvedilol prospective randomized cumulative survival (COPERNICUS) study. Circulation 2002; 106: 2194-9. 12390947
  6. [6]Jackson RD, LaCroix AZ, Gass M, Wallace RB, Robbins J, Lewis CE, et al. Calcium plus vitamin D supplementation and the risk of fractures. N Engl J Med 2006; 354: 669-83. 16481635
  7. [7]Rubin DR. Inference and missing data. Biometrika 1976; 63: 581-92.
  8. [8]Cuzick J, Edwards R, Segnan N. Adjusting for non-compliance and contamination in randomized clinical trials. Stat Med 1997; 16: 1017-29. 9160496
  9. [9]Dunn G. Estimating the causal effects of treatment. Epidemiol Psychiatr Soc 2002; 11: 206-15. 12451968
  10. [10]Dunn G, Maracy M, Tomenson B. Estimating treatment effects from randomized clinical trials with noncompliance and loss to follow-up: the role of instrumental variable methods. Stat Methods Med Res 2005; 14: 369-95. 16178138
  11. [12]Granger BB, Swedberg K, Ekman I, Granger CB, Olofsson B, McMurray JJ, et al. Adherence to candesartan and placebo and outcomes in chronic heart failure in the CHARM programme: double-blind, randomised, controlled clinical trial. Lancet 2005; 366: 2005-11. 16338449
  12. [13]Schiffner R, Schiffner-Rohe J, Gerstenhauer M, Hofstadter F, Landthaler M, Stolz W. Differences in efficacy between intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses for patients with psoriasis vulgaris and atopic dermatitis: clinical and pharmacoeconomic implications. Br J Dermatol 2001; 144: 1154-60. 11422035
  13. [14]Altman DG. Better reporting of randomised controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. BMJ 1996; 313: 570-1. 8806240 PMC2352018
  14. [15]Straus SE. Evidence-based medicine: how to practise and teach EBM. 3rd ed. Elsevier/Churchill Livingstone, 2005.
  15. [16]Evans WN, Ringel JS. Can higher cigarette taxes improve birth outcomes? J Public Econ 1999; 72: 135-54.
  16. [17]McClellan M, McNeil BJ, Newhouse JP. Does more intensive treatment of acute myocardial infarction in the elderly reduce mortality? Analysis using instrumental variables. JAMA 1994; 272: 859-66. 8078163
  17. [18]Schneeweiss S, Seeger JD, Landon J, Walker AM. Aprotinin during coronary-artery bypass grafting and risk of death. N Engl J Med 2008; 358: 771-83. 18287600
  18. [19]Schneeweiss S, Setoguchi S, Brookhart A, Dormuth C, Wang PS. Risk of death associated with the use of conventional versus atypical antipsychotic drugs among elderly patients. CMAJ 2007; 176: 627-32. 17325327 PMC1800321
  19. [20]Hearst N, Newman TB, Hulley SB. Delayed effects of the military draft on mortality. A randomized natural experiment. N Engl J Med 1986; 314: 620-4. 3945247
  20. [21]Cole JA, Norman H, Weatherby LB, Walker AM. Drug copayment and adherence in chronic heart failure: effect on cost and outcomes. Pharmacotherapy 2006; 26: 1157-64. 16863491
  21. [22]Sheehan NA, Didelez V, Burton PR, Tobin MD. Mendelian randomisation and causal inference in observational epidemiology. PLoS Med 2008; 5: e177. 18752343 PMC2522255
  22. [23]Angrist JD, Imbens GW, Rubin DR. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. J Am Stat Assoc 1996; 91: 444-55.
  23. [24]Greenland S. An introduction to instrumental variables for epidemiologists. Int J Epidemiol 2000; 29: 722-9. 10922351
  24. [25]Glasziou PP. Meta-analysis adjusting for compliance: the example of screening for breast cancer. J Clin Epidemiol 1992; 45: 1251-6. 1432006
  25. [26]Walter SD, Guyatt G, Montori VM, Cook R, Prasad K. A new preference-based analysis for randomized trials can estimate treatment acceptability and effect in compliant patients. J Clin Epidemiol 2006; 59: 685-96. 16765271
  26. [27]Bang H, Davis CE. On estimating treatment effects under non-compliance in randomized clinical trials: are intent-to-treat or instrumental variables analyses perfect solutions? Stat Med 2007; 26: 954-64. 16900559
  27. [28]Mealli F, Imbens GW, Ferro S, Biggeri A. Analyzing a randomized trial on breast self-examination with noncompliance and missing outcomes. Biostatistics 2004; 5: 207-22. 15054026
  28. [29]Bond SJ, White IR, Sarah Walker A. Instrumental variables and interactions in the causal analysis of a complex clinical trial. Stat Med 2007; 26: 1473-96. 16900567
  29. [30]Eisenberg D, Quinn BC. Estimating the effect of smoking cessation on weight gain: an instrumental variable approach. Health Serv Res 2006; 41: 2255-66. 17116119 PMC1955320
  30. [31]Sommer A, Zeger SL. On estimating efficacy from clinical trials. Stat Med 1991; 10: 45-52. 2006355
  31. [32]Hewitson P, Glasziou P, Watson E, Towler B, Irwig L. Cochrane systematic review of colorectal cancer screening using the fecal occult blood test (hemoccult): an update. Am J Gastroenterol 2008; 103: 1541-9. 18479499
  32. [33]Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: the Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet 1994; 344: 1383-9. 7968073
  33. [34]Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group. MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20,536 high-risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2002; 360: 7-22.12114036
  34. [35]Basu A, Heckman JJ, Navarro-Lozano S, Urzua S. Use of instrumental variables in the presence of heterogeneity and self-selection: an application to treatments of breast cancer patients. Health Econ 2007; 16: 1133-57. 17910109
  35. [36]Sato T. A method for the analysis of repeated binary outcomes in randomized clinical trials with non-compliance. Stat Med 2001; 20: 2761-74. 11523081
  36. [37]Greenland S, Lanes S, Jara M. Estimating effects from randomized trials with discontinuations: the need for intent-to-treat design and G-estimation. Clin Trials 2008; 5: 5-13. 18283074

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Sussman, J. B., & Hayward, R. A.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2010-05-04
Volume
340
Issue
may04 2
Pages
c2073-c2073
ISSN
  • 0959-8138
  • 1468-5833
DOI
10.1136/bmj.c2073
PMC
PMC3230230
Cited by
176
References
1
Language
en

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