Intention-to-treat versus as-treated versus per-protocol approaches to analysis
DC Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | 안은진 | - |
dc.contributor.author | 강현 | - |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-02-23T00:30:17Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-02-23T00:30:17Z | - |
dc.date.issued | 2023-12 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 2005-6419 | - |
dc.identifier.issn | 2005-7563 | - |
dc.identifier.uri | https://scholarworks.bwise.kr/cau/handle/2019.sw.cau/72300 | - |
dc.description.abstract | Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are considered the most rigorous study design for testing hypotheses and the gold standard for evaluating intervention effectiveness. However, RCTs are often conducted under the assumption of ideal conditions that may differ from real-world scenarios in which various issues, such as loss to follow-up, mistakes in participant enrollment or intervention, and low subject compliance or adherence, may occur. There are various group-defining strategies for analyzing RCT data, including the intention-to-treat (ITT), as-treated, and per-protocol (PP) approaches. The ITT principle involves analyzing all participants according to their initial group assignments, regardless of study completion and compliance or adherence to treatment protocols. This approach aims to replicate real-world clinical settings in which several anticipated or unexpected conditions may occur with regard to the study protocol. For the PP approach, only participants who meet the inclusion criteria, complete the interventions according to the study protocols, and have primary outcome data available are included. This approach aims to confirm treatment effects under optimal conditions. In general, the ITT principle is preferred for superiority and inequality trials, whereas the PP approach is preferred for equivalence and non-inferiority trials. However, both analytical approaches should be conducted and their results compared to determine whether significant differences exist. Overall, using both the ITT and PP approaches can provide a more complete picture of the treatment effects and ensure the reliability of the trial results. | - |
dc.format.extent | 9 | - |
dc.language | 영어 | - |
dc.language.iso | ENG | - |
dc.publisher | 대한마취통증의학회 | - |
dc.title | Intention-to-treat versus as-treated versus per-protocol approaches to analysis | - |
dc.type | Article | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.4097/kja.23278 | - |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, v.76, no.6, pp 531 - 539 | - |
dc.identifier.kciid | ART003020042 | - |
dc.description.isOpenAccess | Y | - |
dc.identifier.wosid | 001124967500001 | - |
dc.identifier.scopusid | 2-s2.0-85178464544 | - |
dc.citation.endPage | 539 | - |
dc.citation.number | 6 | - |
dc.citation.startPage | 531 | - |
dc.citation.title | Korean Journal of Anesthesiology | - |
dc.citation.volume | 76 | - |
dc.type.docType | Article | - |
dc.publisher.location | 대한민국 | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Data analysis | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Intention to treat analysis | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Intervention study | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Randomized controlled trial | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Statistics | - |
dc.subject.keywordAuthor | Treatment outcome. | - |
dc.relation.journalResearchArea | Anesthesiology | - |
dc.relation.journalWebOfScienceCategory | Anesthesiology | - |
dc.description.journalRegisteredClass | scie | - |
dc.description.journalRegisteredClass | scopus | - |
dc.description.journalRegisteredClass | kci | - |
Items in ScholarWorks are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
84, Heukseok-ro, Dongjak-gu, Seoul, Republic of Korea (06974)02-820-6194
COPYRIGHT 2019 Chung-Ang University All Rights Reserved.
Certain data included herein are derived from the © Web of Science of Clarivate Analytics. All rights reserved.
You may not copy or re-distribute this material in whole or in part without the prior written consent of Clarivate Analytics.