The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Composite outcomes in cardiovascular research: a survey of randomized trials.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Composite end points are common in clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: To describe how composite outcomes are used, constructed, and reported in cardiovascular trials and to evaluate the contribution of individual end points to the composite estimate of effect in those trials. DESIGN: Review of 2-group, parallel-design, randomized cardiovascular trials that used composite end points and were published in 14 clinical journals from 1 January 2000 to 1 January 2007. SETTING: Published randomized trials in cardiovascular medicine and surgery. PARTICIPANTS: Two-group, parallel-design trials published in 14 leading general medical, cardiology, and cardiothoracic surgery journals from 1 January 2000 to 1 January 2007. MEASUREMENTS: The types and numbers of individual events included in the composite outcome and P values and risk estimates for the composite outcome. RESULTS: Of 304 trials published that used composite outcomes, 221 (73%) reported a composite primary outcome and 83 (27%) reported a composite secondary outcome. Composite outcomes comprised a median of 3 (interquartile range, 3 to 4) individual outcomes; death was the most common individual outcome. The total number of individual events and the total number of events represented by the composite outcome differed in 79% of trials. P values for composite outcomes were less than 0.050 more frequently than they were 0.050 or greater. Death as an individual end point made a relatively minimal contribution to estimates of effect summarized by the trials' composite end points, whereas revascularization made a greater contribution. LIMITATION: All-cause and cardiovascular mortality were not distinguished, and the findings might not apply to trials in other fields. CONCLUSION: Composite outcomes in cardiovascular trials are frequent and commonly comprise 3 to 4 individual end points that vary in clinical significance. Discrepancies between the total number of individual events in a trial and those reported for composite outcomes are common. Individual outcomes do not contribute equally to composite measures, so the overall estimate of effect for a composite measure cannot be assumed to apply equally to each of its individual outcomes.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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
“The use of a combined endpoint will give problems if the predictor effect is in opposite directions for different outcomes included in the composite endpoint [52],[53].”
From Reporting and Methods in Clinical Prediction Research: A Systematic Review (2012) · cites this paper as [53]
Citations
Cites
Fundamentals of Clinical Trials
Friedman, L. M., Furberg, C. D., DeMets, D. L., Reboussin, D. M., & Granger, C. B. (2015) · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-18539-2 · Cited by 2,237
Composite Outcomes in Randomized Trials
Freemantle, N., Calvert, M., Wood, J., Eastaugh, J., & Griffin, C. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.19.2554 · Cited by 798
Validity of composite end points in clinical trials
Montori, V. M., Permanyer-Miralda, G., González, I. F., Busse, J. W., Pacheco‐Huergo, V., Bryant, D., Alonso, J., Akl, E. A., Domingo‐Salvany, A., Mills, E. J., et al. (2005) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7491.594 · Cited by 449
Lessons Learned From Recent Cardiovascular Clinical Trials: Part II
DeMets, D. L., & Califf, R. M. (2002) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.0000023220.26465.89 · Cited by 122
Combined endpoints: can we use them?
Lubsen, J. C., & Kirwan, B. (2002) · Statistics in Medicine · doi:10.1002/sim.1300 · Cited by 107
Lessons Learned From Recent Cardiovascular Clinical Trials: Part I
DeMets, D. L., & Califf, R. M. (2002) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.0000023219.51483.66 · Cited by 104
Clinical Trials—Multiple Treatments, Multiple End Points, and Multiple Lessons
Lauer, M. S. (2003) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.289.19.2575 · Cited by 100
Clinical perspectives on the use of composite endpoints
Cannon, C. P. (1997) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/s0197-2456(97)00005-6 · Cited by 53
Validity of composite end points in clinical trials
On, L. (2005) · Cited by 51
Use of composite endpoints in thrombolysis trials of acute myocardial infarction
D, E. B. M., Cannon, C. P., & McCabe, C. H. (1993) · The American Journal of Cardiology · doi:10.1016/0002-9149(93)90101-h · Cited by 46
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Reporting and Methods in Clinical Prediction Research: A Systematic Review
Bouwmeester, W., Zuithoff, N. P. A., Mallett, S., Geerlings, M. I., Vergouwe, Y., Steyerberg, E. W., Altman, D. G., & Moons, K. G. M. (2012) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001221 · Cited by 600
Self-citationWhy clinical trial outcomes fail to translate into benefits for patients
Heneghan, C., Goldacre, B., & Mahtani, K. R. (2017) · Trials · doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1870-2 · Cited by 404
Composite End Points in Randomized Trials: There Is No Free Lunch
Tomlinson, G., & Detsky, A. S. (2010) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2009.2017 · Cited by 121
Metadata
- Authors
- Lim, E., Brown, A., Helmy, A., Mussa, S., & Altman, D. G.
- Affiliations
- Royal Papworth Hospital (GB)
- Venue
- Annals of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American College of Physicians
- Published
- 2008-11-04
- Volume
- 149
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 612-617
- ISSN
- 0003-4819 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-3704
- OpenAlex
- W2086077933
- Cited by
- 116
- References
- 10
- Citations by year
- 2026: 6 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 7.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Annals of Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research (ACF-2006-14-004)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Statistics and Probability › Statistical Methods in Clinical Trials
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
- Keywords
- composite endpoints, cardiovascular clinical trials, primary outcomes, secondary outcomes, revascularization, p-values, risk estimates, trial reporting, cardiovascular surgery
- MeSH terms
- Cardiology, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Humans, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Biomedical Research
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