These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
4. A systematic review finds variable use of the intention-to-treat principle in musculoskeletal randomized controlled trials with missing data. Joseph R; Sim J; Ogollah R; Lewis M J Clin Epidemiol; 2015 Jan; 68(1):15-24. PubMed ID: 25304501 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The Primary Outcome Is Positive - Is That Good Enough? Pocock SJ; Stone GW N Engl J Med; 2016 Sep; 375(10):971-9. PubMed ID: 27602669 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
6. The implications of non-compliance: Randomised controlled trials: the intention-to-treat principle. Platt AC; Turner EL BJOG; 2019 Oct; 126(11):1337. PubMed ID: 31222882 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
7. Adjusting for Nonadherence or Stopping Treatments in Randomized Clinical Trials. Adler AI; Latimer NR JAMA; 2021 May; 325(20):2110-2111. PubMed ID: 34032845 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Intention-to-treat in randomized controlled trials: recommendations for a total trial strategy. Polit DF; Gillespie BM Res Nurs Health; 2010 Aug; 33(4):355-68. PubMed ID: 20645423 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Precise definitions of some terminology for longitudinal clinical trials: subjects, patient populations, analysis sets, intention to treat, and related terms. Helms RW Pharm Stat; 2016 Nov; 15(6):471-485. PubMed ID: 27620652 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Addressing missing participant outcome data in dental clinical trials. Spineli LM; Fleming PS; Pandis N J Dent; 2015 Jun; 43(6):605-18. PubMed ID: 25837533 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comment to the reply letter: Letter to the Editor: Preference option randomized design (PORD) for comparative effectiveness research: Statistical power for testing comparative effect, preference effect, selection effect, intent-to-treat effect, and overall effect (SMMR, Vol. 28, Issue 2, 2019). Walter SD; Macaskill P; Turner R; Guyatt G; Cook R; Prasad K Stat Methods Med Res; 2019 May; 28(5):1603. PubMed ID: 29633654 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Intention to treat analysis: how frequently is it used in ENT randomised controlled trials? Achar P; Mitra I; Duvvi S; Kumar BN Clin Otolaryngol; 2010 Feb; 35(1):65-7. PubMed ID: 20447170 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. Deviation from intention to treat analysis in randomised trials and treatment effect estimates: meta-epidemiological study. Abraha I; Cherubini A; Cozzolino F; De Florio R; Luchetta ML; Rimland JM; Folletti I; Marchesi M; Germani A; Orso M; Eusebi P; Montedori A BMJ; 2015 May; 350():h2445. PubMed ID: 26016488 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Approaches to data analyses of clinical trials. Furberg CD; Friedman LM Prog Cardiovasc Dis; 2012; 54(4):330-4. PubMed ID: 22225999 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Editorial: Estimands in clinical trials - a challenge to intention to treat? Day S Stat Med; 2017 Jan; 36(1):3-4. PubMed ID: 27917553 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. A systematic review found that deviations from intention-to-treat are common in randomized trials and systematic reviews. Abraha I; Cozzolino F; Orso M; Marchesi M; Germani A; Lombardo G; Eusebi P; De Florio R; Luchetta ML; Iorio A; Montedori A J Clin Epidemiol; 2017 Apr; 84():37-46. PubMed ID: 28088592 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]