Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 58, Issue 2 , Pages 211-212 , February 2005

Is analysis of covariance the most appropriate way to analyse changes in randomized controlled trials?

References 

  1. Twisk J, Proper K. Evaluation of the results of a randomized controlled trial: how to define changes between baseline and follow-up. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:223–228
  2. Boshuizen HC. Letter to the editor. Re: Twisk and Proper: evaluation of the results of a randomized controlled trial: how to define changes between baseline and follow-up. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;58:209–210
  3. Chambles LE, Roeback JR. Methods for assessing difference between groups in change when initial measurement is subject to intra-individual variation. Stat Med. 1993;12:1213–1237
  4. Senn S. Letter to the editor: methods for assessing difference between groups in change when initial measurement is subject to intra-individual variation. Stat Med. 1994;13:2280–2283
  5. Chambles LE, Roeback JR. Author's reply. Stat Med. 1994;13:1283–1285
  6. Senn S. Letter to the editor: in defense of analysis of covariance: a reply to Chambles and Roeback. Stat Med. 1995;14:2283–2288
  7. Chambles LE, Davis V. Analysis of associations with change in a multivariate outcome variable when baseline is subject to measurement error. Stat Med. 2003;22:1041–1067
  8. Yanez ND, Kronmal RA, Shemanski LR. The effects of measurement error in response variables and tests of association of explanatory variables in change models. Stat Med. 1998;17:2597–2606

PII: S0895-4356(04)00237-9

doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.06.010

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
Volume 58, Issue 2 , Pages 211-212 , February 2005

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution