Defining non-inferiority margins in randomised controlled surgical trials: a protocol for a systematic review

被引:0
|
作者
Kuemmerli, Christoph [1 ,2 ]
Gallagher, Iain J. [3 ]
Skipworth, Richard [4 ]
Laird, Barry [5 ]
机构
[1] Univ Edinburgh, Med Sch, Mol Genet & Populat Hlth Sci, Edinburgh, Scotland
[2] Univ Hosp Basel, Univ Digest Hlth Care Ctr, Dept Surg, Clarunis, Basel, Switzerland
[3] Edinburgh Napier Univ, Ctr Biomed & Global Hlth, Edinburgh, Scotland
[4] Royal Infirm Edinburgh NHS Trust, Dept Gen Surg, Edinburgh, Scotland
[5] Edinburgh Canc Res Ctr, European Palliat Care Res Ctr, Edinburgh, Scotland
来源
BMJ OPEN | 2024年 / 14卷 / 08期
关键词
randomized controlled trial; systematic review; research design; surgery; PROPORTIONS;
D O I
10.1136/bmjopen-2024-089587
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background The reporting of randomised controlled non-inferiority (NI) drug trials is poor with less than 50% of published trials reporting a justification of the NI margin. This is despite the introduction of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) extension on reporting of NI and equivalence in randomised trials. It is critical to set the appropriate NI margin as this choice dictates the conclusions of the trial. Methods to estimate the margin are heterogeneous but generally based on clinical judgement and statistical reasoning, and hence tailored to each clinical situation. Yet an appraisal of NI in clinical trials has not been undertaken. Therefore the aim of this systematic review is to assess the reporting and methodological quality of defining the NI margin. Surgical NI trials have been chosen as our prototype to assess this.Methods We will conduct a systematic review of published randomised controlled trials in abdominal surgery that use an NI design. Key eligibility criteria will be: surgical intervention in at least one trial arm; adult patients and a sample size of 100 or more. Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched from inception until the date of the search. Identified studies will be assessed for reporting according to the CONSORT recommendations. The outcomes are the description of the methods for defining the NI margin, and the robustness of the NI margin estimation. The latter will be based on simulations using alternative assumptions for model parameters. The results of the simulation will be compared with the trial authors' conclusions.Anticipated results The review will describe and appraise the design and reporting of surgical NI trials including shortcomings thereof and allow a comparison with pharmaceutical trials. These findings will inform researchers on the appropriate design and pitfalls when conducting surgical randomised controlled trials with an NI design and promote thorough and standardised reporting of study findings.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval is not required and any changes to the protocol will be communicated via the registration platform. The final manuscript will be submitted to a journal for publication and the findings will be disseminated through conference presentations to inform researchers and the public.
引用
收藏
页码:1 / 4
页数:4
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] A protocol for a systematic review of non-randomised evaluations of strategies to increase participant retention to randomised controlled trials
    El Feky, Adel
    Gillies, Katie
    Gardner, Heidi
    Fraser, Cynthia
    Treweek, Shaun
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2018, 7
  • [42] A protocol for a systematic review of non-randomised evaluations of strategies to improve participant recruitment to randomised controlled trials
    Gardner H.R.
    Fraser C.
    MacLennan G.
    Treweek S.
    Systematic Reviews, 5 (1)
  • [43] A protocol for a systematic review of non-randomised evaluations of strategies to increase participant retention to randomised controlled trials
    Adel El Feky
    Katie Gillies
    Heidi Gardner
    Cynthia Fraser
    Shaun Treweek
    Systematic Reviews, 7
  • [44] Introduction to randomized trials: Non-inferiority trials
    Simon, E. -G.
    Fouche, C. -J.
    Perrotin, F.
    GYNECOLOGIE OBSTETRIQUE & FERTILITE, 2012, 40 (09): : 554 - 556
  • [45] Surgical ablation of atrial fibrillation: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
    McClure, Graham R.
    Belley-Cote, Emilie P.
    Singal, Rohit K.
    Jaffer, Iqbal H.
    Dvirnik, Nazari
    An, Kevin R.
    Fortin, Gabriel
    Spence, Jessica
    Whitlock, Richard P.
    BMJ OPEN, 2016, 6 (11):
  • [46] The quality of reporting of randomised controlled trials in asthma: systematic review protocol
    Ntala, Chara
    Birmpili, Panagiota
    Worth, Allison
    Anderson, Niall H.
    Sheikh, Aziz
    PRIMARY CARE RESPIRATORY JOURNAL, 2013, 22 (01): : PS1 - PS8
  • [47] Prayer as a pain intervention: protocol of a systematic review of randomised controlled trials
    Ferreira-Valente, Alexandra
    Jarego, Margarida
    Queiroz-Garcia, Ines
    Pimenta, Filipa
    Costa, Rui Miguel
    Day, Melissa A.
    Pais-Ribeiro, Jose
    Jensen, Mark P.
    BMJ OPEN, 2021, 11 (07):
  • [48] Bayesian interpretation of non-inferiority in transcatheter versus surgical aortic valve replacement trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Heuts, Samuel
    Kawczynski, Michal J.
    Sardari Nia, Peyman
    Maessen, Jos G.
    Biondi-Zoccai, Giuseppe
    Gabrio, Andrea
    INTERDISCIPLINARY CARDIOVASCULAR AND THORACIC SURGERY, 2023, 37 (05):
  • [49] Reporting Quality of Non-inferiority and Equivalence Rheumatoid Arthritis Randomized Clinical Trials: A Systematic Review
    Alalwan, Osama
    Haider, Majeed
    ARTHRITIS & RHEUMATOLOGY, 2024, 76 : 3425 - 3428
  • [50] Deficient Reporting and Interpretation of Non-Inferiority Randomized Clinical Trials in HIV Patients: A Systematic Review
    Hernandez, Adrian V.
    Pasupuleti, Vinay
    Deshpande, Abhishek
    Thota, Priyaleela
    Collins, Jaime A.
    Vidal, Jose E.
    PLOS ONE, 2013, 8 (05):