Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2010 Aug 18:341:c3653.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.c3653.

Inconsistent reporting of surrogate outcomes in randomised clinical trials: cohort study

Jeppe Lerche la Cour  1 , Jesper Brok, Peter C Gøtzsche
Affiliations
Review

Inconsistent reporting of surrogate outcomes in randomised clinical trials: cohort study

Jeppe Lerche la Cour et al. BMJ. .

Abstract

Objective: To assess if authors of randomised clinical trials convey the fact that they have used surrogate outcomes and discussed their validity.

Design: Cohort study.

Setting: Six major general medical journals.

Participants: Randomised clinical trials published in 2005 and 2006 that used a surrogate as a primary outcome.

Results: Of 626 published randomised clinical trials, 109 (17%) used a surrogate as a primary outcome. Of these trials, 62 (57%, 95% confidence interval 47% to 67%) clearly reported that the primary outcome was a surrogate. Only 38 (35%, 26% to 45%) also discussed the validity of the surrogate.

Conclusion: Only about one third of authors of randomised clinical trials that used a surrogate as a primary outcome reported adequately on the surrogate. Better reporting is needed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interest: All authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form at www.icmje.org/coi_disclosure.pdf (available on request from the corresponding author) and declare: no support from any company for the submitted work; no financial relationships with any companies that might have an interest in the submitted work in the previous 3 years; no other relationships or activities that could appear to have influenced the submitted work.

Figures

None
Selection of trials
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Bucher HC, Guyatt GH, Cook DJ, Holbrook A. Users’ guides to the medical literature XIX. Applying clinical trial results. A. How to use an article measuring the effect of an intervention on surrogate end points. JAMA 1999;282:771-8. - PubMed
    1. Gluud C, Krogsgaard K. Would you trust a surrogate respondent? Lancet 1997;349:665-6. - PubMed
    1. Gøtzsche PC, Torri ALV, Rossetti L. Beware of surrogate outcome measures. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1996;12:238-46. - PubMed
    1. Theodore Mazzone T, Meyer PM, Feinstein SB, Davidson MH, Kondos GT, D’Agostino RB, et al. Effect of pioglitazone compared with glimepiride on carotid intima-media thickness in type 2 diabetes: a randomized trial. JAMA 2006;296:2572-81. - PubMed
    1. Wier CJ, Walley RJ. Statistical evaluation of biomarkers as surrogate endpoints: a literature review. Stat Med 2006;25:183-203. - PubMed

MeSH terms