CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 7Statistical Methods in Clinical TrialsAdvanced Causal Inference TechniquesMeta-analysis and systematic reviews

Trial analysis by treatment allocated or by treatment received? Origins of ‘the intention-to-treat principle’ to reduce allocation bias: Part 1

Open access
Chalmers, I, Matthews, R, Glasziou, P, Boutron, I, Armitage, P·2023·Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
DOI 10.1177/01410768231203922PMC PMC10695151
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Good and bad effects of treatments are sometimes so dramatic that they can be recognised reliably using informal before-and-after treatment comparisons. Relief of pain after spinal injection of a powerful analgesic or allergic reactions to drugs are examples. Much more usually, important wanted and unwanted effects of treatments are not dramatic and cannot be reliably detected using informal comparisons. In this common situation, detecting real treatment effects entails comparing sufficiently numerous people who have received one of two or more alternative treatments, or by comparing contemporaneously those who have received a treatment with those who have not.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/01410768231203922

Cites

26 of 26 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

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

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Chalmers, I., Matthews, R., Glasziou, P., Boutron, I., & Armitage, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Aston University (GB)
  • Bond University (AU)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • 2 Reading Road, Wallingford OX10 9DP, UK
Corresponding author
Chalmers, I
ORCID
Venue
Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2023-10
Volume
116
Issue
10
Pages
343-350
ISSN
  • 0141-0768 (ISSN-L)
  • 1758-1095
DOI
10.1177/01410768231203922
PMC
PMC10695151
OpenAlex
W4388658942
Cited by
7
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 5 · 2023: 1
FWCI
1.42
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • Bond University Research Portal (Bond University) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (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
allocation bias, randomized controlled trials, treatment allocation, treatment effects, bias mitigation, history of clinical trials
MeSH terms
Humans, Research Design, Bias, Treatment Outcome, Intention, Intention to Treat Analysis

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