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