ArticleBMC medical research methodology2014
Choosing sensitivity analyses for randomised trials: principles.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
36 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Sensitivity analysis in Bayesian clinical trials was underused and poorly reported: a systematic survey.BMC medical research methodology · 2026Pooled it
- Evaluating whether the proportional odds models to analyse ordinal outcomes in COVID-19 clinical trials is providing clinically interpretable treatment effects: A systematic review.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2024Pooled it
- Non-inferiority trials: are they inferior? A systematic review of reporting in major medical journals.BMJ open · 2016Pooled it
- Comparison of the Working Alliance in Blended Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Treatment as Usual for Depression in Europe: Secondary Data Analysis of the E-COMPARED Randomized Controlled Trial.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Trial
- Estimands for factorial trials.Statistics in medicine · 2022Trial
- Planning a method for covariate adjustment in individually randomised trials: a practical guide.Trials · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- Strength-balance supplemented with computerized cognitive training to improve dual task gait and divided attention in older adults: a multicenter randomized-controlled trial.BMC geriatrics · 2014Trial
- Trial
- Trial
- A Diverse Fiber Mixture, Reflective of a Nutritionally Balanced Diet, Is Well Tolerated by Healthy Adults.Current developments in nutrition · 2026Article
- The Role of Analysis Populations and Estimands in Clinical Trials.Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN · 2026Article
- A severity-anchored, patient-reported outcome framework for clinical trials in post-stroke dysphagia.Frontiers in neurology · 2026Article
- Evaluating the agreement between sensitivity and primary analyses in observational studies using routinely collected healthcare data: a meta-epidemiology study.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- From controversy to clarity: reimagining the role of CDK4/6 inhibitors in the adjuvant setting- a number needed to treat perspective.Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology · 2025Article
- SPIRIT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for protocols of randomised trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- CONSORT 2025 explanation and elaboration: updated guideline for reporting randomised trials.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
- Comparison of Smart Display Versus Laptop Platforms for an eHealth Intervention to Improve Functional Health for Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions: Protocol for a Randomized Clinical Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2025Article
- Reporting of cluster randomised crossover trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement with explanation and elaboration.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSensitivity analyses are an important tool for understanding the extent to which the results of randomised trials depend upon the assumptions of the analysis. There is currently no guidance governing the choice of sensitivity analyses. DISCUSSION: We provide a principled approach to choosing sensitivity analyses through the consideration of the following questions: 1) Does the proposed sensitivity analysis address the same question as the primary analysis? 2) Is it possible for the proposed sensitivity analysis to return a different result to the primary analysis? 3) If the results do differ, is there any uncertainty as to which will be believed? Answering all of these questions in the affirmative will help researchers to identify relevant sensitivity analyses. Treating analyses as sensitivity analyses when one or more of the answers are negative can be misleading and confuse the interpretation of studies. The value of these questions is illustrated with several examples. SUMMARY: By removing unreasonable analyses that might have been performed, these questions will lead to relevant sensitivity analyses, which help to assess the robustness of trial results.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.