+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials in rheumatoid arthritis: the reporting and handling of missing data in composite outcomes

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials in rheumatoid arthritis: the reporting and handling of missing data in composite outcomes

Trials 17(1): 272

Most reported outcome measures in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) trials are composite, whose components comprise single measures that are combined into one outcome. The aims of this review were to assess the range of missing data rates in primary composite outcomes and to document the current practice for handling and reporting missing data in published RA trials compared to the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) recommendations. A systematic search for randomised controlled trials was conducted for RA trials published between 2008 and 2013 in four rheumatology and four high impact general medical journals. A total of 51 trials with a composite primary outcome were identified, of which 38 (75 %) used the binary American College of Rheumatology responder index and 13 (25 %) used the Disease Activity Score for 28 joints (DAS28). Forty-four trials (86 %) reported on an intention-to-treat analysis population, while 7 trials (14 %) analysed according to a modified intention-to-treat population. Missing data rates for the primary composite outcome ranged from 2-53 % and were above 30 % in 9 trials, 20-30 % in 11 trials, 10-20 % in 18 trials and below 10 % in 13 trials. Thirty-eight trials (75 %) used non-responder imputation and 10 (20 %) used last observation carried forward to impute missing composite outcome data at the primary time point. The rate of dropout was on average 61 % times higher in the placebo group compared to the treatment group in the 34 placebo controlled trials (relative rate 1.61, 95 % CI: 1.29, 2.02). Thirty-seven trials (73 %) did not report the use of sensitivity analyses to assess the handling of missing data in the primary analysis as recommended by CONSORT guidelines. This review highlights an improvement in rheumatology trial practice since the revision of CONSORT guidelines, in terms of power calculation and participant's flow diagram. However, there is a need to improve the handling and reporting of missing composite outcome data and their components in RA trials. In particular, sensitivity analyses need to be more widely used in RA trials because imputation is widespread and generally uses single imputation methods, and in this area the missing data rates are commonly differentially higher in the placebo group.

Please choose payment method:

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 057102882

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 27255212

DOI: 10.1186/s13063-016-1402-5

Related references

A systematic survey on reporting and methods for handling missing participant data for continuous outcomes in randomized controlled trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 88: 57-66, 2017

Quality of reporting of harms in randomised controlled trials of pharmacological interventions for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review. Evidence-Based Medicine 22(5): 170-177, 2017

A systematic survey of the methods literature on the reporting quality and optimal methods of handling participants with missing outcome data for continuous outcomes in randomized controlled trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 88: 67-80, 2017

Reporting of radiographic methods in randomised controlled trials assessing structural outcomes in rheumatoid arthritis. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 66(5): 651-657, 2006

Statistical analysis and handling of missing data in cluster randomised trials: protocol for a systematic review. Bmj Open 5(5): E007378, 2016

Etanercept therapy in rheumatoid arthritis and the risk of malignancies: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 68(7): 1177-1183, 2008

Non-compliance with randomised allocation and missing outcome data in randomised controlled trials evaluating surgical interventions: a systematic review. Bmc Research Notes 8: 403, 2016

Quality of missing data reporting and handling in palliative care trials demonstrates that further development of the CONSORT statement is required: a systematic review. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 88: 81-91, 2017

Missing data in randomized controlled trials of rheumatoid arthritis with radiographic outcomes: a simulation study. Arthritis and Rheumatism 59(1): 25-31, 2008

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials of interventions reporting outcomes for relatives of people with psychosis. Clinical Psychology Review 33(3): 372-382, 2013

Treatment of missing data in follow-up studies of randomised controlled trials: A systematic review of the literature. Clinical Trials 14(4): 387-395, 2017

Reporting of patient-reported outcomes in recent trials in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review. Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 68(2): 183-190, 2008

The level of reporting of neurocognitive outcomes in randomised controlled trials of brain tumour patients: A systematic review. European Journal of Cancer 100: 104-125, 2018

Data in longitudinal randomised controlled trials in cancer pain: is there any loss of the information available in the data? Results of a systematic literature review and guideline for reporting. Bmc Cancer 16(1): 771, 2017

Efficacy and safety of valdecoxib for treatment of osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. Pain 111(3): 286-296, 2004