SAGE Journals Online
Advertisement
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Advertisement

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Angiology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Cleophas, T. J. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Cleophas, T. J. M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Underestimation of Treatment Effect in Crossover Trials

Ton J. M. Cleophas

Department of Medicine, Merwede Hospital Sliedrecht-Dordrecht, Sliedrecht, The Netherlands

In crossover trials each subject serves as his own control. For the study of cardiovascular diseases such as hypertension and angina pectoria, properly designed crossover studies are preferred to parallel studies. There is a consider able between-subject variability of symptoms in some of these conditions. Bias due to this is eliminated by the use of a crossover design. However, a problem is the so-called treatment-by-period interaction. The present study analyzes the potential influences of this on the outcome of the trial. Physical carryover effect, defined as a physical effect of the first treatment period carrying on into the second, tends to minimize differences between two consecutive treatment periods. So does the frustrating experience of an inactive agent in the first treatment period. Outside influences such as the change of the seasons may affect lengthy crossover trials in a similar way. The author concludes that the treatment effect in a crossover trial tends to be underestimated. The current concept that reports of clinical trials are generally biased toward an exaggeration of treatment effects does not seem to apply to crossover trials.

Angiology, Vol. 41, No. 9, 673-680 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/000331979004100901


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?




Advertisement