Charlson M E, Horwitz R I
Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1984 Nov 10;289(6454):1281-4. doi: 10.1136/bmj.289.6454.1281.
The problem of generalisability in randomised clinical trials was highlighted by studies that entered only 10-14% of screened patients. To determine the magnitude and source of prerandomisation losses in clinical trials a survey was conducted of 41 trials listed in the 1979 inventory of the National Institute of Health. Two thirds of the trials maintained screening logs, but only half maintained any records of the number of patients who met the eligibility criteria but were not entered into the trial. Among 21 trials (51%) that kept data on the number of patients who were eligible but not entered, losses of eligible subjects were attributable to refusals by patients in 25% and refusals by physicians in 29%. Other protocol requirements accounted for the remaining losses of eligible patients. Only a few trials documented the characteristics of patients who were eligible but not entered; in those trials the patients who were not entered were similar demographically but differed clinically from those enrolled. Thus minimising prerandomisation losses of eligible patients requires the use of less restrictive criteria for entering patients. Twenty four of the trials achieved 75% or more of their recruitment goals, eight between 25% and 74%, and six less than 25%. Among trials that screened less than twice their projected sample size, only three out of 13 (23%) achieved 75% or more of their recruitment goal. By contrast, 12 out of 16 trials (75%) that screened more than twice their projected sample size achieved 75% or more of their recruitment goal. Screening large numbers of patients appears to be a pragmatic requirement for success in achieving recruitment goals; therefore, trials should not be criticised as lacking generalisability on that basis alone. The number and characteristics of eligible patients who were not entered, however, were documented by only a few trials; these data are critical in the assessment of generalisability. Additionally, the number of patients with the index disease who did not meet the eligibility criteria should also be documented. Together, these two types of data characterise the population to whom the trial results may be applied.
仅纳入10%-14%被筛查患者的研究凸显了随机临床试验中的可推广性问题。为确定临床试验中随机分组前损失的程度和来源,对国立卫生研究院1979年目录中列出的41项试验进行了一项调查。三分之二的试验保留了筛查记录,但只有一半保留了符合入选标准但未进入试验的患者数量的任何记录。在21项(51%)记录了符合条件但未入选患者数量的数据的试验中,符合条件受试者的损失25%归因于患者拒绝,29%归因于医生拒绝。其他方案要求导致了符合条件患者的其余损失。只有少数试验记录了符合条件但未入选患者的特征;在那些试验中,未入选的患者在人口统计学上相似,但在临床方面与入选患者不同。因此,尽量减少符合条件患者的随机分组前损失需要采用限制较少的患者入选标准。24项试验达到了其招募目标的75%或更多,8项在25%至74%之间,6项低于25%。在筛查人数少于其预计样本量两倍的试验中,13项中的3项(23%)达到了其招募目标的75%或更多。相比之下,在筛查人数超过其预计样本量两倍的16项试验中,12项(75%)达到了其招募目标的75%或更多。筛查大量患者似乎是实现招募目标成功的一个实际要求;因此,不应仅基于这一点就批评试验缺乏可推广性。然而,只有少数试验记录了未入选的符合条件患者的数量和特征;这些数据对于评估可推广性至关重要。此外,不符合入选标准的指数疾病患者数量也应记录。这两类数据共同刻画了试验结果可能适用的人群特征。