ArticleJAMA network open2020
Application of the Reverse Fragility Index to Statistically Nonsignificant Randomized Clinical Trial Results.
Article in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers, 17 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
49 citing papers in PubMed, 17 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 103 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fragility of Randomized Controlled Trials for Fluid Resuscitation in Acute Pancreatitis.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2026Pooled it
- Fragility of randomized clinical trials comparing surgical approaches for inguinal hernia repair: a systematic review.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Robustness and fragility of evidence supporting systemic thrombolysis in acute pulmonary embolism.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2026Pooled it
- The Statistical Fragility of Saline Nasal Irrigation for Rhinosinusitis: A Systematic Review.The Laryngoscope · 2026Pooled it
- Robustness of placebo-controlled trials of extended-duration direct oral anticoagulant therapy for secondary venous thromboembolism prevention.Internal and emergency medicine · 2026Pooled it
- The Impact of Study Size on COVID-19 Treatment Outcomes: A Meta-Epidemiological Study Comparing Large and Small Randomized Controlled Trials: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses.Reviews in medical virology · 2026Pooled it
- High continuous fragility index values for randomised controlled trials investigating medial patellofemoral ligament reconstruction for patellar instability: A systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Pooled it
- How statistically fragile are randomized controlled trials comparing quadriceps tendon autografts with hamstring or bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts in anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction?Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Pooled it
- The Statistical Fragility of Marrow Stimulation for Cartilage Defects of the Knee: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.Cartilage · 2024Pooled it
- The Continuous Fragility Index of Statistically Significant Findings in Randomized Controlled Trials That Compare Interventions for Anterior Shoulder Instability.The American journal of sports medicine · 2024Pooled it
- The fragility index and reverse fragility index of FDA investigational device exemption trials in spinal fusion surgery: a systematic review.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024Pooled it
- Robustness of Longitudinal Safety and Efficacy After Paclitaxel-Based Endovascular Therapy for Treatment of Femoro-Popliteal Artery Occlusive Disease: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Annals of vascular surgery · 2024Pooled it
- The statistical fragility of intramedullary reaming in tibial nail fixation: a systematic review.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2023Pooled it
- The reverse fragility index: RCTs reporting non-significant differences in failure rates between hamstring and bone-patellar tendon-bone autografts have fragile results.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Pooled it
- Assessing the robustness of COVID-19 vaccine efficacy trials: systematic review and meta-analysis, January 2023.Euro surveillance : bulletin Europeen sur les maladies transmissibles = European communicable disease bulletin · 2023Pooled it
- Fragility of cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) examining nutrition interventions among patients with diabetes mellitus: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.Hormones (Athens, Greece) · 2022Pooled it
- Robustness of outcomes in trials evaluating sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors for heart failure.ESC heart failure · 2022Pooled it
- Interpret with caution: randomized controlled trials comparing cemented versus press-fit hemiarthroplasty in geriatric patients with intracapsular hip fractures are statistically fragile.OTA international : the open access journal of orthopaedic trauma · 2026Article
- Reporting of second-generationContemporary clinical trials communications · 2026Article
- β-Blockers after myocardial infarction with preserved or mildly reduced left ventricular ejection fraction: Fragility of contemporary evidence.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Interpreting randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and their clinical relevance is challenging when P values are either marginally above or below the P = .05 threshold. Objective: To use the concept of reverse fragility index (RFI) to provide a measure of confidence in the neutrality of RCT results when assessed from the clinical perspective. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cross-sectional study, a MEDLINE search was conducted for RCTs published from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2018, in JAMA, the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), and The Lancet. Eligible studies were phase 3 and 4 trials with 1:1 randomization and statistically nonsignificant binary primary end points. Data analysis was performed from August 1, 2019, to August 31, 2019. Exposures: Single vs multicenter enrollment, total number of events, private vs government funding, placebo vs active control, and time to event vs frequency data. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the median RFI with interquartile range (IQR) at the P = .05 threshold. Secondary outcomes were the number of RCTs in which the number of participants lost to follow-up was greater than the RFI; the median RFI with IQR at different P value thresholds; the median reverse fragility quotient with IQR; and the correlation between sample sizes, number of events, and P values of the RCT and RFI. Results: Of the 167 RCTs included, 76 (46%) were published in the NEJM, 50 (30%) in JAMA, and 41 (24%) in The Lancet. The median (IQR) sample size was 970 (470-3427) participants, and the median (IQR) number of events was 251 (105-570). The median (IQR) RFI at the P = .05 threshold was 8 (5-13). Fifty-seven RCTs (34%) had an RFI of 5 or lower, and in 68 RCTs (41%) the number of participants lost to follow-up was greater than the RFI. Trials with P values ranging from P = .06 to P = .10 had a median (IQR) RFI of 3 (2-4). When compared, median (IQR) RFIs were not statistically significant for single-center vs multicenter enrollment (5 [4-13] vs 8 [5-13]; P = .41), private vs government-funded studies (9 [5-13] vs 8 [5-13]; P = .34), and time-to-event primary end points vs frequency data (9 [5-14] vs 7 [4-13]; P = .43). The median (IQR) RFI at the P = .01 threshold was 12 (7-19) and at the P = .005 threshold was 14 (9-21). Conclusions and Relevance: This cross-sectional study found that a relatively small number of events (median of 8) had to change to move the primary end point of an RCT from nonsignificant to statistically significant. These findings emphasize the nuance required when interpreting trial results that did not meet prespecified significance thresholds.
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.