Fragility in cardiovascular randomized controlled trials with primary continuous outcomes (2018-2022) from multi-perspectives assessment: a cross-sectional survey.

Ann Med

Department of Urology, Innovation Institute for Integration of Medicine and Engineering, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, P.R. China.

Published: December 2024

AI Article Synopsis

  • The study evaluates the stability of cardiovascular disease randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from 2018-2022 by analyzing continuous fragility indices, which indicate how many patient outcomes can change significance by slight variations in data.
  • A total of 64 RCTs with 76 primary outcomes were examined, revealing the median continuous fragility index (CFI) was 7, suggesting that changing a small number of outcomes can significantly impact statistical results.
  • The research highlights the importance of reporting the fragility index alongside p-values to help better understand the reliability of study findings, as many results displayed considerable statistical instability.

Article Abstract

Objective: This study aims to assess the robustness of cardiovascular disease randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with primary continuous outcomes from a clinical perspective, utilizing the concepts of continuous fragility index (CFI), reverse continuous fragility index (RCFI) and their corresponding quotients (CFQ, RCFQ).

Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted, searching PubMed for cardiovascular RCTs published between January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2022, in eight high-impact journals. Inclusion criteria were phase III or IV trials with 1:1 randomization, reporting at least one primary continuous outcome. Data analysis involved altering each outcome until achieving the reversal of significance (ɑ = 0.05) to determine the CFI or RCFI. The fragility quotients were then calculated by dividing the CFI or RCFI by the sample size, and Spearman's correlation assessed correlation analyses.

Results: Of 3983 records were screened, and 64 RCTs (76 outcomes) were included. The fragility index was analysed with 72 outcomes. The overall median CFI was 7, with an associated median CFQ of 0.032. Nonsignificant values exhibited greater statistical instability (median RCFI = 5, RCFQ = 0.023) than significant values (median CFI = 14, CFQ = 0.062). Interestingly, "fragile" values were found in 36% (9/25) of CFI or 46.7% (7/15) of RCFI. Additionally, fragility index showed a significant association with several variables.

Conclusions: The findings suggest that changing only a small number of interventions (median of 7) could alter outcome significance. Reporting the fragility index alongside values is recommended to provide a clearer understanding of statistical findings' robustness.HighlightsThe continuous fragility index (CFI) represents the minimum patient count needed to modify significance by altering their intervention.Among 72 primary continuous outcomes in 64 cardiovascular RCTs, the overall median CFI was 7, with a corresponding CFQ of 0.032.CFI demonstrated moderate to strong correlations with sample size, total dropouts, and patient numbers analyzed.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11616752PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07853890.2024.2427909DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

primary continuous
16
continuous outcomes
12
continuous fragility
12
median cfi
12
fragility
8
randomized controlled
8
controlled trials
8
cfi
8
fragility cfi
8
cardiovascular rcts
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!