What if the original study wasn't powered to look at this outcome, and they also had to drop ~50% of the total sample from the analysis due to missing data?
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
(I clicked it depends to see the results)
-
It depends is always the right answer
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Dodgy unless (in my amateur opinion): 1. Prospectively registered both trials before beginning recruiting 2. Statistical analysis of both includes allowances for the combined multiple endpoints.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It is still an RCT (because it is still randomised and controlled) but may not be valid if 1. The other outcomes were not in the original protocol 2. The other outcomes are the result of a post hoc analysis.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
RCT yes, but the outcomes must be described as exploratory, with appropriate caveats (acknowledging if these were selected entirely post-hoc, or had been listed as exploratory in the protocol).
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.