Subgroup analysis in randomised controlled trials¶
Rothwell. (2005). Subgroup analysis in randomised controlled trials: importance, indications, and interpretation.
Cited by¶
1 citation across 1 artifact.
Domain-specific¶
- Lord's Paradox
- Education and behavioural research — learning gains compared between groups with different starting scores; difference scores versus residualised-change scores giving opposite verdicts. Clinical-trial subgroup analysis — subgroups defined by baseline severity, where randomisation does not hold within subgroup
Supported in partVerified against a saved copy of the source
“Subgroup analyses are important if there are potentially large differences between groups in the risk of a poor outcome with or without treatment”
- Education and behavioural research — learning gains compared between groups with different starting scores; difference scores versus residualised-change scores giving opposite verdicts. Clinical-trial subgroup analysis — subgroups defined by baseline severity, where randomisation does not hold within subgroup
Verification¶
Does it exist? Not checked yet. This work's DOI is recorded above but has not been resolved against an external catalogue, so nothing here confirms the work exists.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 1 citation: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:230a00a663e1 · see in the full table