Skip to main content
Article
Intention-to-treat analyses in behavioral medicine randomized clinical trials
Preventive and Behavioral Medicine Publications and Presentations
  • Sherry L. Pagoto, University of Massachusetts Medical School
  • Andrea T. Kozak, Oakland University
  • Priya John, University of Chicago
  • Jamie S. Bodenlos, University of Massachusetts Medical School
  • Donald Hedeker, University of Illinois
  • Bonnie J. Spring, Northwestern University
  • Kristin L. Schneider, University of Massachusetts Medical School
UMMS Affiliation
Department of Medicine, Division of Preventive and Behavioral Medicine
Date
3-26-2009
Document Type
Article
Subjects
Humans; Intention to Treat Analysis; Quality Control; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; data; Regression Analysis; *Statistics as Topic
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intention-to-treat (ITT) is an analytic approach where all randomized participants are included in analyses and in their originally assigned condition, regardless of adherence or protocol deviation. PURPOSE: The present study aimed to determine whether reporting and correct use of ITT in behavioral medicine randomized clinical trials (RCTs) published in behavioral journals has improved in recent years. METHOD: ITT and related analytic conventions were examined in behavioral medicine RCTs (N = 87) published in Annals of Behavioral Medicine, Health Psychology, and the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology in the years 2000-2003 and then again in 2006-2007. Logistic regression analyses tested whether ten indicators associated with ITT were being used increasingly over time. Also tested was whether reporting and correct use of ITT improved following the adoption of Consolidated Standards of Reporting Clinical Trials (CONSORT) statement. RESULTS: Results revealed that less than half of RCTs (42%) used ITT analyses correctly. Over time, reporting of sample size estimation and primary outcome as well as use of the term "ITT" to describe analyses improved; however, correct implementation of ITT did not. Improvement was not specifically attributable to CONSORT adoption. CONCLUSION: Investigators' claims of using ITT analyses have increased over time, but correct use of ITT has not.
Rights and Permissions
Citation: Int J Behav Med. 2009;16(4):316-22. Link to article on publisher's site
Related Resources
Link to Article in PubMed
PubMed ID
19319693
Citation Information
Sherry L. Pagoto, Andrea T. Kozak, Priya John, Jamie S. Bodenlos, et al.. "Intention-to-treat analyses in behavioral medicine randomized clinical trials" Vol. 16 Iss. 4 (2009) ISSN: 1070-5503 (Linking)
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/sherry_pagoto/23/