Skip to main content

Table 2 Abstract conclusions of included not statistically significant trials with a superiority design categorized by study characteristics

From: Are potentially clinically meaningful benefits misinterpreted in cardiovascular randomized trials? A systematic examination of statistical significance, clinical significance, and authors’ conclusions

  Authors’ conclusion in the abstract p-value
Control superior Neutral Treatment superior
Number of studies 16 58 18  
Comparator
 Placebo/nothing: 49 studies (%) 12 (24) 29 (59) 8 (16) 0.15a
 Standard/active comparator: 43 studies (%) 4 (9) 29 (67) 10 (23)
Funding
 Industry: 37 studies (%) 9 (24) 21 (57) 7 (19) 0.14a
 Mixed: 35 studies (%) 7 (20) 20 (57) 8 (23)
 Public: 20 studies (%) 0 17 (85) 3 (15)
Point estimate
 Median (interquartile range) 0.99 (0.96–1.09) 0.95 (0.90–1.01) 0.88 (0.83–0.98) 0.006b
 Point estimate >0.94: 48 studies (%) 14 (29) 29 (60) 5 (10) 0.002a
 Point estimate ≤0.94: 44 studies (%) 2 (5) 29 (66) 13 (30)
Lower confidence interval
 Median (interquartile range) 0.84 (0.73–0.89) 0.79 (0.66–0.86) 0.66 (0.57–0.69) 0.005b
 Confidence interval >0.75: 51 studies (%) 11 (22) 37 (73) 3 (6) 0.001a
 Confidence interval ≤0.75: 41 studies (%) 5 (12) 21 (51) 15 (37)
  1. aChi-square
  2. bIndependent samples median test