Calculation of NNTs in RCTs with time-to-event outcomes: A literature review
Open Access
- 20 March 2009
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Springer Nature in BMC Medical Research Methodology
- Vol. 9 (1) , 21
Abstract
The number needed to treat (NNT) is a well-known effect measure for reporting the results of clinical trials. In the case of time-to-event outcomes, the calculation of NNTs is more difficult than in the case of binary data. The frequency of using NNTs to report results of randomised controlled trials (RCT) investigating time-to-event outcomes and the adequacy of the applied calculation methods are unknown. We searched in PubMed for RCTs with parallel group design and individual randomisation, published in four frequently cited journals between 2003 and 2005. We evaluated the type of outcome, the frequency of reporting NNTs with corresponding confidence intervals, and assessed the adequacy of the methods used to calculate NNTs in the case of time-to-event outcomes. The search resulted in 734 eligible RCTs. Of these, 373 RCTs investigated time-to-event outcomes and 361 analyzed binary data. In total, 62 articles reported NNTs (34 articles with time-to-event outcomes, 28 articles with binary outcomes). Of the 34 articles reporting NNTs derived from time-to-event outcomes, only 17 applied an appropriate calculation method. Of the 62 articles reporting NNTs, only 21 articles presented corresponding confidence intervals. The NNT is used as effect measure to present the results from RCTs with binary and time-to-event outcomes in the current medical literature. In the case of time-to-event data incorrect methods were frequently applied. Confidence intervals for NNTs were given in one third of the NNT reporting articles only. In summary, there is much room for improvement in the application of NNTs to present results of RCTs, especially where the outcome is time to an event.Keywords
This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- Estimating adjusted NNT measures in logistic regression analysisStatistics in Medicine, 2007
- Annualized was found better than absolute risk reduction in the calculation of number needed to treat in chronic conditionsJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2006
- Confidence intervals for an exposure adjusted incidence rate difference with applications to clinical trialsStatistics in Medicine, 2005
- NNT for studies with long-term follow-upCanadian Medical Association Journal, 2005
- Number Needed to Treat (NNT)2005
- Influence of number needed to treat, costs and outcome on preferences for a preventive drugFamily Practice, 2004
- The number needed to treat: a useful clinical measure or a case of the Emperor's new clothes?Pharmaceutical Statistics, 2003
- Number needed to treat: easily understood and intuitively meaningful?: Theoretical considerations and a randomized trialJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 2002
- Number Needed to Treat: Properties and ProblemsJournal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, 2000
- An Assessment of Clinically Useful Measures of the Consequences of TreatmentNew England Journal of Medicine, 1988