- Framework of problems / Objective
- Failure to define clinically meaningful outcomes
- Potential impact of missing outcome data on treatment effects in systematic reviews: imputation study
| Ref ID | 491 |
| First Author | L. A. Kahale |
| Journal | BMJ |
| Year Of Publishing | 2020 |
| URL | https://www.bmj.com/content/bmj/370/bmj.m2898.full.pdf |
| Keywords |
Cochrane Missing data Statistical General medical |
| Problem(s) |
Failure to address missing outcome data in analyses Failure to define clinically meaningful outcomes |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 100 |
| Summary of Findings | The median change in the relative effect estimate varied from 0% to 30.4% (implausible assumptions) and from 1.4% to 7.0%. (plausible assumptions). Meta-analyses crossing the threshold of the null effect varied from 1% (best case scenario) to 60% (worst case scenario) and 26% changed direction with the worst case scenario. Using an imputation approach based on information missingness odds ratio, meta-analyses crossing the threshold of the null effect varied from 6% to 22%, and 2% changed direction with the most stringent. Judgments of whether changes in effect estimate are clinically significant requires using minimal clinically important difference, which varies by clinical question. |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | Yes |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | Yes |