Cited by 192Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsAcute Ischemic Stroke ManagementStatistical Methods in Epidemiology

Can We Improve the Statistical Analysis of Stroke Trials?: Statistical Reanalysis of Functional Outcomes in Stroke Trials

Open access
The Optimising Analysis of Stroke Trials (OAST) Collaboration·2007·Stroke

Abstract

Background and Purpose— Most large acute stroke trials have been neutral. Functional outcome is usually analyzed using a yes or no answer, eg, death or dependency versus independence. We assessed which statistical approaches are most efficient in analyzing outcomes from stroke trials. Methods— Individual patient data from acute, rehabilitation and stroke unit trials studying the effects of interventions which alter functional outcome were assessed. Outcomes included modified Rankin Scale, Barthel Index, and “3 questions”. Data were analyzed using a variety of approaches which compare 2 treatment groups. The results for each statistical test for each trial were then compared. Results— Data from 55 datasets were obtained (47 trials, 54 173 patients). The test results differed substantially so that approaches which use the ordered nature of functional outcome data (ordinal logistic regression, t test, robust ranks test, bootstrapping the difference in mean rank) were more efficient statistically than those which collapse the data into 2 groups (χ 2 ; ANOVA, P <0.001). The findings were consistent across different types and sizes of trial and for the different measures of functional outcome. Conclusions— When analyzing functional outcome from stroke trials, statistical tests which use the original ordered data are more efficient and more likely to yield reliable results. Suitable approaches included ordinal logistic regression, t test, and robust ranks test.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/strokeaha.106.474080

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • The statistical assumptions underlying the t test were not met for most of the acute data sets.

    “However, the statistical assumptions underlying the t test were not met for most of the acute data sets. 9”
  • Continuous analyses based on the t test had comparable power to ordinal analyses when compared with ordinal and dichotomous analyses of existing acute stroke trial data.

    “When compared with ordinal and dichotomous analyses of existing acute stroke trial data, continuous analyses (based on the t test) had comparable power to ordinal analyses. 9”
  • Using individual patient data from acute stroke trials, the OAST Collaboration found the ordering of approaches, best first, was: ordinal logistic regression, t test, robust ranks test, bootstrap, Mann-Whitney U/Wilcoxon test, Cochran-Armitage ranks test, 2 x 2 chi-square test, and median test.

    “Using individual patient data from acute stroke trials, the OAST Collaboration compared several approaches and found that their ordering ('best' first) was: ordinal logistic regression, t test, robust ranks test, bootstrap, Mann-Whitney U /Wilcoxon test, Cochran-Armitage ranks test, 2 × 2 𝛘 2 test, and median test. 9”
  • The International Stroke Trial was neutral with a dichotomous analysis but positive using a variety of different ordinal analyses.

    “(3) International Stroke Trial (IST; aspirin for acute ischemic stroke, Phase III megatrial) was neutral with a dichotomous analysis (primary analysis) 8 but positive using a variety of different ordinal analyses (data from 9 )”
  • Alteplase reduced the mRS by a median 1 point in the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke study of alteplase, analyzed by Mann-Whitney U test or robust ranks test.

    “Second, the reduction of death or dependency may be described by the difference in medians, for example, alteplase reduced the mRS by a median 1 point in the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke study of alteplase (analysis by Mann-Whitney U test or robust ranks test; Table 1). 9”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
The Optimising Analysis of Stroke Trials (OAST) Collaboration
Affiliations
University of Nottingham (GB)
Corresponding author
The Optimising Analysis of Stroke Trials (OAST) Collaboration
Venue
Stroke
Published
2007-06
Volume
38
Issue
6
Pages
1911-1915
ISSN
  • 0039-2499 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4628
OpenAlex
W1843498179
Cited by
192
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 9
FWCI
10.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Stroke (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Repository@Nottingham (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Nottingham ePrints (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion)
  • Nottingham ePrints (University of Nottingham) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Leicester Research Archive (University of Leicester) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Acute Ischemic Stroke Management
  • Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Epidemiology
Keywords
acute stroke trials, functional outcome, ordinal data analysis, ordinal logistic regression, modified Rankin Scale, Barthel Index, individual patient data, stroke rehabilitation
MeSH terms
Stroke Rehabilitation, Humans, Models, Statistical, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Recovery of Function, Stroke

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