How to use a subgroup analysis: users' guide to the medical literature.

Clinicians, when trying to apply trial results to patient care, need to individualize patient care and, potentially, manage patients based on results of subgroup analyses. Apparently compelling subgroup effects often prove spurious, and guidance is needed to differentiate credible from less credible subgroup claims. We therefore provide 5 criteria to use when assessing the validity of subgroup analyses: (1) Can chance explain the apparent subgroup effect; (2) Is the effect consistent across studies; (3) Was the subgroup hypothesis one of a small number of hypotheses developed a priori with direction specified; (4) Is there strong preexisting biological support; and (5) Is the evidence supporting the effect based on within- or between-study comparisons. The first 4 criteria are applicable to individual studies or systematic reviews, the last only to systematic reviews of multiple studies. These criteria will help clinicians deciding whether to use subgroup analyses to guide their patient care.

[1]  Collaborative overview of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy--I: Prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke by prolonged antiplatelet therapy in various categories of patients. Antiplatelet Trialists' Collaboration. , 1994, BMJ.

[2]  C H Schmid,et al.  An empirical study of the effect of the control rate as a predictor of treatment efficacy in meta-analysis of clinical trials. , 1998, Statistics in medicine.

[3]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Empirical Evaluation of Age Groups and Age-Subgroup Analyses in Pediatric Randomized Trials and Pediatric Meta-analyses , 2012, Pediatrics.

[4]  Bess Dawson-Hughes,et al.  Fracture prevention with vitamin D supplementation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. , 2005, JAMA.

[5]  J. Ioannidis Microarrays and molecular research: noise discovery? , 2005, The Lancet.

[6]  M. Buyse,et al.  Analysis of clinical trial outcomes: some comments on subgroup analyses. , 1989, Controlled clinical trials.

[7]  C. Natanson,et al.  The sirens' songs of confirmatory sepsis trials: selection bias and sampling error. , 1998, Critical care medicine.

[8]  Jonathan J Deeks,et al.  Issues in the selection of a summary statistic for meta‐analysis of clinical trials with binary outcomes , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[9]  B. Schneider Analysis of clinical trial outcomes: alternative approaches to subgroup analysis. , 1989, Controlled clinical trials.

[10]  Scott K Aberegg,et al.  Intensive insulin therapy in the medical ICU. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  Jennifer G. Robinson,et al.  2013 ACC/AHA Guideline on the Assessment of Cardiovascular Risk: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines , 2014, Circulation.

[12]  Radcliffe Infirmary,et al.  Collaborative overview of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy - III: Reduction in venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism by antiplatelet prophylaxis among surgical and medical patients , 1994, BMJ.

[13]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: systematic review , 2012, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[14]  J. Hirsh,et al.  Sex differences in the antithrombotic effects of aspirin. , 1978, Blood.

[15]  Sarah Parish,et al.  Randomized trial of intravenous streptokinase, oral aspirin, both, or neither among 17,187 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction: ISIS-2.ISIS-2 (Second International Study of Infarct Survival) Collaborative Group. , 1988, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[16]  C. Reid,et al.  A comparison of outcomes with angiotensin-converting--enzyme inhibitors and diuretics for hypertension in the elderly. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[17]  Shuler,et al.  Study to prospectively evaluate reamed intramedually nails in patients with tibial fractures (S.P.R.I.N.T.): study rationale and design. , 2008 .

[18]  Stephen W Lagakos,et al.  Statistics in medicine--reporting of subgroup analyses in clinical trials. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[19]  M Alan Brookhart,et al.  Primary prevention of cardiovascular diseases with statin therapy: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. , 2006, Archives of internal medicine.

[20]  Mohit Bhandari,et al.  Study to prospectively evaluate reamed intramedually nails in patients with tibial fractures (S.P.R.I.N.T.): Study rationale and design , 2008, BMC musculoskeletal disorders.

[21]  S. Pocock,et al.  Subgroup analysis, covariate adjustment and baseline comparisons in clinical trial reporting: current practiceand problems , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[22]  G. Guyatt,et al.  The influence of study characteristics on reporting of subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: systematic review , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[23]  Xin Sun,et al.  Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses , 2010, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[24]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  Can we individualize the 'number needed to treat'? An empirical study of summary effect measures in meta-analyses. , 2002, International journal of epidemiology.

[25]  M. Schaller,et al.  Confirmatory platelet-activating factor receptor antagonist trial in patients with severe gram-negative bacterial sepsis: a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial. BN 52021 Sepsis Investigator Group. , 1998, Critical care medicine.

[26]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  What Should the Genome-wide Significance Threshold Be? Empirical Replication of Borderline Genetic Associations Yfor a Full List of Investigators Offering Data and Clarifications See Acknowledgments , 2022 .

[27]  C. Furberg,et al.  Lessons from overviews of cardiovascular trials. , 1987, Statistics in medicine.

[28]  Sangeeta Mehta,et al.  Vasopressin versus norepinephrine infusion in patients with septic shock. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  J. Slattery,et al.  The miracle of DICE therapy for acute stroke: fact or fictional product of subgroup analysis? , 1994, BMJ.

[30]  J. Dhainaut,et al.  Platelet‐activating factor receptor antagonist BN 52021 in the treatment of severe sepsis: A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, multicenter clinical trial , 1994 .

[31]  L. Bolognese,et al.  RANDOMISED TRIAL OF INTRAVENOUS STREPTOKINASE, ORAL ASPIRIN, BOTH, OR NEITHER AMONG 17 187 CASES OF SUSPECTED ACUTE MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION: ISIS-2 , 1988, The Lancet.