An introduction to multiplicity issues in clinical trials: the what, why, when and how
Top Cited Papers
- 26 December 2016
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in International Journal of Epidemiology
- Vol. 46 (2), 746-755
- https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw320
Abstract
In clinical trials it is not uncommon to face a multiple testing problem which can have an impact on both type I and type II error rates, leading to inappropriate interpretation of trial results. Multiplicity issues may need to be considered at the design, analysis and interpretation stages of a trial. The proportion of trial reports not adequately correcting for multiple testing remains substantial. The purpose of this article is to provide an introduction to multiple testing issues in clinical trials, and to reduce confusion around the need for multiplicity adjustments. We use a tutorial, question-and-answer approach to address the key issues of why, when and how to consider multiplicity adjustments in trials. We summarize the relevant circumstances under which multiplicity adjustments ought to be considered, as well as options for carrying out multiplicity adjustments in terms of trial design factors including Population, Intervention/Comparison, Outcome, Time frame and Analysis (PICOTA). Results are presented in an easy-to-use table and flow diagrams. Confusion about multiplicity issues can be reduced or avoided by considering the potential impact of multiplicity on type I and II errors and, if necessary pre-specifying statistical approaches to either avoid or adjust for multiplicity in the trial protocol or analysis plan.Keywords
This publication has 59 references indexed in Scilit:
- A tutorial on sensitivity analyses in clinical trials: the what, why, when and howBMC Medical Research Methodology, 2013
- Reporting of analyses from randomized controlled trials with multiple arms: a systematic reviewBMC Medicine, 2013
- Co-enrollment of critically ill patients into multiple studies: patterns, predictors and consequencesCritical Care, 2013
- Dalteparin versus Unfractionated Heparin in Critically Ill PatientsThe New England Journal of Medicine, 2011
- The cost of large numbers of hypothesis tests on power, effect size and sample sizeMolecular Psychiatry, 2010
- The future of drug development: advancing clinical trial designNature Reviews Drug Discovery, 2009
- Multi-Arm Clinical Trials of New Agents: Some Design ConsiderationsClinical Cancer Research, 2008
- Problems with use of composite end points in cardiovascular trials: systematic review of randomised controlled trialsBMJ, 2007
- Stopping rules for phase II studiesBritish Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 2001