ArticleBMJ open2019
Power estimations for non-primary outcomes in randomised clinical trials.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 4 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
19 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Effects of oxytocin administration on non-social executive functions in humans: a preregistered systematic review and meta-analysis.Molecular psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Fatigue self-management led by occupational therapists and/or physiotherapists for chronic conditions: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Chronic illness · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The effect of ketamine on cognition, anxiety, and social functioning in adults with psychiatric disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Pooled it
- Trial
- Effect of a Digital Health Physical Activity Program Integrating Gamification for Obesity Management in Comparison With Usual Care: Randomized Controlled Trial With an Ideographic Approach.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Trial
- Trial
- Effectiveness of Specific Techniques in Behavioral Teacher Training for Childhood ADHD Behaviors: Secondary Analyses of a Randomized Controlled Microtrial.Research on child and adolescent psychopathology · 2022Trial
- Trial
- Targeted hypothermia versus targeted normothermia after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: a statistical analysis plan.Trials · 2020Trial
- Article
- Sedation, temperature and pressure after cardiac arrest and resuscitation-The STEPCARE trial: A statistical analysis plan.Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2025Article
- Article
- Observed intervention effects for mortality in randomised clinical trials: a methodological study protocol.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Quality of life, patient satisfaction, and cardiovascular outcomes of the randomised 2 x 3 factorial Copenhagen insulin and Metformin therapy (CIMT) trial - A detailed statistical analysis plan.Contemporary clinical trials communications · 2023Article
- Review
- Multicenter study evaluating factors associated with treatment outcome for low back pain injections.Regional anesthesia and pain medicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE AND
methodsIt is rare that trialists report power estimations of non-primary outcomes. In the present article, we will describe how to define a valid hierarchy of outcomes in a randomised clinical trial, to limit problems with Type I and Type II errors, using considerations on the clinical relevance of the outcomes and power estimations.
conclusionPower estimations of non-primary outcomes may guide trialists in classifying non-primary outcomes as secondary or exploratory. The power estimations are simple and if they are used systematically, more appropriate outcome hierarchies can be defined, and trial results will become more interpretable.
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.