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
. 2014 Mar;155(3):461-466.
doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2013.11.009. Epub 2013 Nov 23.

Reporting of primary analyses and multiplicity adjustment in recent analgesic clinical trials: ACTTION systematic review and recommendations

Jennifer S Gewandter  1 , Shannon M Smith, Andrew McKeown, Laurie B Burke, Sharon H Hertz, Matthew Hunsinger, Nathaniel P Katz, Allison H Lin, Michael P McDermott, Bob A Rappaport, Mark R Williams, Dennis C Turk, Robert H Dworkin
Affiliations

Reporting of primary analyses and multiplicity adjustment in recent analgesic clinical trials: ACTTION systematic review and recommendations

Jennifer S Gewandter et al. Pain. 2014 Mar.

Abstract

Performing multiple analyses in clinical trials can inflate the probability of a type I error, or the chance of falsely concluding a significant effect of the treatment. Strategies to minimize type I error probability include prespecification of primary analyses and statistical adjustment for multiple comparisons, when applicable. The objective of this study was to assess the quality of primary analysis reporting and frequency of multiplicity adjustment in 3 major pain journals (ie, European Journal of Pain, Journal of Pain, and PAIN®). A total of 161 randomized controlled trials investigating noninvasive pharmacological treatments or interventional treatments for pain, published between 2006 and 2012, were included. Only 52% of trials identified a primary analysis, and only 10% of trials reported prespecification of that analysis. Among the 33 articles that identified a primary analysis with multiple testing, 15 (45%) adjusted for multiplicity; of those 15, only 2 (13%) reported prespecification of the adjustment methodology. Trials in clinical pain conditions and industry-sponsored trials identified a primary analysis more often than trials in experimental pain models and non-industry-sponsored trials, respectively. The results of this systematic review demonstrate deficiencies in the reporting and possibly the execution of primary analyses in published analgesic trials. These deficiencies can be rectified by changes in, or better enforcement of, journal policies pertaining to requirements for the reporting of analyses of clinical trial data.

Keywords: Multiplicity; Primary analysis reporting; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D, Gøtzsche PC, Lang T. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001;134:663-694.
    1. Bauer P, Chi G, Geller N, Gould AL, Jordan D, Mohanty S, O'Neill R, Westfall PH. Industry, government, and academic panel discussion on multiple comparisons in a “real” phase three clinical trial. J Biopharm Stat 2003;13:691-701.
    1. Dmitrienko A, Tamhane AC. Gatekeeping procedures with clinical trial applications. Pharm Stat 2007;6:171-180.
    1. Dmitrienko A, Wiens BL, Tamhane AC, Wang X. Tree-structured gatekeeping tests in clinical trials with hierarchically ordered multiple objectives. Stat Med 2007;26:2465-2478.
    1. Dworkin RH, Turk DC, Peirce-Sandner S, Baron R, Bellamy N, Burke LB, Chappell A, Chartier K, Cleeland CS, Costello A, Cowan P, Dimitrova R, Ellenberg S, Farrar JT, French JA, Gilron I, Hertz S, Jadad AR, Jay GW, Kalliomaki J, Katz NP, Kerns RD, Manning DC, McDermott MP, McGrath PJ, Narayana A, Porter L, Quessy S, Rappaport BA, Rauschkolb C, Reeve BB, Rhodes T, Sampaio C, Simpson DM, Stauffer JW, Stucki G, Tobias J, White RE, Witter J. Research design considerations for confirmatory chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. PAIN® 2010;149:177-193.

Publication types

MeSH terms