The Use of the Intention-to-Treat Principle in Nursing Clinical Trials
| File | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 59033_1.pdf | 120Kb | Adobe PDF | View |
| Title | The Use of the Intention-to-Treat Principle in Nursing Clinical Trials |
|---|---|
| Author | Polit, Denise F.; Gillespie, Brigid Mary |
| Journal Name | Nursing Research |
| Year Published | 2009 |
| Place of publication | USA |
| Publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
| Abstract | Background: In randomized controlled trials (RCTs), the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle, which involves maintaining study participants in the treatment groups to which they were randomized regardless of postrandomization withdrawal, is the recommended analytic approach for preserving the integrity of randomization, yet little is known about the use of ITT in nursing RCTs. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to describe the extent to which nurse researchers who conduct RCTs state that they have used ITT, the extent to which they adhere to ITT principles, and the methods they use to handle missing data. Methods: Data regarding ITT analysis, participant flow, rates of attrition, and methods of handling missing data were extracted and coded from a consecutive sample of 124 RCTs published in 16 nursing journals in 2007 and 2008. Results: ITT was declared in only 15.3% of the nursing RCTs, and a definition of ITT was offered in fewer than half of these studies. On the basis of the authors' descriptions of analytic procedures, it was concluded that 10.5% of those claiming ITT use had used a per-protocol analysis rather than an ITT analysis. Overall, 46.8% of the RCTs were classified as having either a classic or a modified ITT analysis, indicating that many nurse researchers are not stating their actual adherence to ITT, despite advice to do so in the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines. Conclusions: Nurse researchers conducting RCTs should be more diligent in following the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines about ITT, documenting ITT use in their reports, clarifying their definition of ITT, and presenting flowcharts that describe subject flow. Readers of nursing reports, in evaluating evidence from RCTs, should not rely on stated use of ITT but should examine how analyses were conducted. |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Published | Yes |
| Alternative URI | http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/NNR.0b013e3181bf1505 |
| Copyright Statement | Copyright 2009 LWW. This is a non-final version of an article published in final form in Journal of Nursing Research [Volume, Issue, Page numbers]. Reproduced in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal link for access to the definitive, published version. |
| Volume | 58 |
| Issue Number | 6 |
| Page from | 391 |
| Page to | 399 |
| ISSN | 0029-6562 |
| Date Accessioned | 2009-12-15 |
| Date Available | 2010-07-12T06:40:20Z |
| Language | en_AU |
| Research Centre | Griffith Health Institute; Centre for Health Practice Innovation |
| Faculty | Griffith Health Faculty |
| Subject | Nursing; PRE2009-Clinical Nursing: Secondary (Acute Care) |
| URI | http://hdl.handle.net/10072/31115 |
| Publication Type | Journal Articles (Refereed Article) |
| Publication Type Code | c1a |
Please use this identifier to cite this record: http://hdl.handle.net/10072/31115
Griffith University copyright notice
Copyright in individual works within the repository belongs to their authors or publishers. You may make a print or digital copy of a work for your personal non-commercial use. All other rights are reserved, except for fair dealings or other user rights granted by the copyright laws of your country.
Back to top