Individual and composite study endpoints: separating the wheat from the chaff
- PMID: 24486289
- PMCID: PMC4019929
- DOI: 10.1016/j.amjmed.2014.01.011
Individual and composite study endpoints: separating the wheat from the chaff
Abstract
We provide an overview of the individual and combined clinical endpoints and patient-reported outcomes typically used in clinical trials and prospective epidemiological investigations. We discuss the strengths and limitations associated with the utilization of aggregated study endpoints and surrogate measures of important clinical endpoints and patient-centered outcomes. We hope that the points raised in this overview will lead to the collection of clinically rich, relevant, measurable, and cost-efficient study outcomes.
Keywords: Clinical epidemiology; Study design; Study outcomes and endpoints.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
References
-
- Begg CB, Cho MK, Eastwood S, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. JAMA. 1996;276:637–639. - PubMed
-
- Collins R, MacMahon S. Reliable assessment of the effects of treatment on mortality and major morbidity, I: Clinical trials. Lancet. 2001;357:373–380. - PubMed
-
- Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Lancet. 2001;357:1191–1194. - PubMed
-
- Tunis SR, Stryer DB, Clancy CM. Practical clinical trials. Increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. JAMA. 2003;290:1624–1632. - PubMed
-
- Head SJ, Kaul S, Bogers AJ, Kappetein AP. Non-inferiority study design: lessons to be learned from cardiovascular trials. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:1318–1324. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
