Applying results of randomised trials to clinical practice: impact of losses before randomisation.

The problem of generalisability in randomised clinical trials was highlighted by studies that entered only 10-14% of screened patients. To determine the magnitude and source of prerandomisation losses in clinical trials a survey was conducted of 41 trials listed in the 1979 inventory of the National Institute of Health. Two thirds of the trials maintained screening logs, but only half maintained any records of the number of patients who met the eligibility criteria but were not entered into the trial. Among 21 trials (51%) that kept data on the number of patients who were eligible but not entered, losses of eligible subjects were attributable to refusals by patients in 25% and refusals by physicians in 29%. Other protocol requirements accounted for the remaining losses of eligible patients. Only a few trials documented the characteristics of patients who were eligible but not entered; in those trials the patients who were not entered were similar demographically but differed clinically from those enrolled. Thus minimising prerandomisation losses of eligible patients requires the use of less restrictive criteria for entering patients. Twenty four of the trials achieved 75% or more of their recruitment goals, eight between 25% and 74%, and six less than 25%. Among trials that screened less than twice their projected sample size, only three out of 13 (23%) achieved 75% or more of their recruitment goal. By contrast, 12 out of 16 trials (75%) that screened more than twice their projected sample size achieved 75% or more of their recruitment goal. Screening large numbers of patients appears to be a pragmatic requirement for success in achieving recruitment goals; therefore, trials should not be criticised as lacking generalisability on that basis alone. The number and characteristics of eligible patients who were not entered, however, were documented by only a few trials; these data are critical in the assessment of generalisability. Additionally, the number of patients with the index disease who did not meet the eligibility criteria should also be documented. Together, these two types of data characterise the population to whom the trial results may be applied.

[1]  Informed consent: ethical, legal, and medical implications for doctors and patients who participate in randomised clinical trials. , 1983, British medical journal.

[2]  R. Bergstrand,et al.  Bias due to non-participation and heterogenous sub-groups in population surveys. , 1983, Journal of chronic diseases.

[3]  D. Hunninghake,et al.  Recruitment for clinical trials: the Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial experience. Its implications for future trials. , 1982, Circulation.

[4]  S. Gore Assessing, clinical trials-- protocol and monitoring. , 1981, British medical journal.

[5]  J. Mitchell,et al.  Timolol after myocardial infarction: an answer or a new set of questions? , 1981, British medical journal.

[6]  Timolol-induced reduction in mortality and reinfarction in patients surviving acute myocardial infarction. , 1981, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  D. Sackett,et al.  Controversy in counting and attributing events in clinical trials. , 1979, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  J. Wild,et al.  Characteristics of men most likely to respond to an invitation to be screened. , 1979, American journal of public health.

[9]  N. Fost Consent as a Barrier to Research , 1979 .

[10]  M. Zelen A new design for randomized clinical trials. , 1979, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  E. Barrett-Connor,et al.  Differences between respondents and non-respondents in a population-based cardiovascular disease study. , 1978, American journal of epidemiology.

[12]  J. Carey,et al.  Veterans Administration cooperative study of surgery for coronary arterial occlusive disease--I. , 1978, The American journal of cardiology.

[13]  F. Loop,et al.  Coronary bypass surgery weighed in the balance. , 1978, The American journal of cardiology.

[14]  J. Whisnant The Canadian trial of aspirin and sulfinpyrazone in threatened stroke. , 1980, American heart journal.

[15]  S Greenland,et al.  Response and follow-up bias in cohort studies. , 1977, American journal of epidemiology.

[16]  T. Takaro,et al.  Veterans Administration Cooperative Study of Surgery for Coronary Arterial Occlusive Disease. III. Methods and baseline characteristics, including experience with medical treatment. By the Veterans Administration Cooperative Group for the Study of Surgery for Coronary Arterial Occlusive Disease. , 1977, The American journal of cardiology.

[17]  G. Ramsby,et al.  PROPHYLACTIC PORTACAVAL ANASTOMOSIS: A Tale of Two Studies , 1972 .