Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. Epidemiology and Psychiatric Sciences
  4. Volume 11
Journal Home
Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Publication date:

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×
< Back to all volumes

Volume 11 - September 2002

Contents

Page 3 of 3

Front matter

  • EPS volume 11 issue 1 Cover and Front matter

  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    07 August 2014, pp. f1-f10
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Instruments

Meeting Report

Research Article

  • Estimating the causal effects of treatment

  • Graham Dunn
  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 October 2011, pp. 206-215

  • Objective – To provide a relatively non-technical review of recent statistical research on the analysis and interpretation of the results of randomised controlled trials in which there are possibly all three of the following types of protocol violation: non-adherence to allocated treatment, contamination (that is, patients receiving treatments other than the one to which they were allocated) and attrition (missing outcome data). Methods – The estimation methods involve the use of potential outcomes (counterfactuals) in the definition of a causal effect of treatment and in drawing valid inferences concerning its size. Results – The methods are explained through the use of simple arithmetical expressions involving the counts from three-way contingency tables (Outcome by Treatment Received by Random Allocation). Illustration is provided through the use of a hypothetical data set. Conclusions – Recent advances in statistical methodology enable one to estimate treatment effects from the results of randomised trials in which the treatment actually received is not necessarily the one to which the patient was allocated. These methods allow one to make adjustments to allow for both non-compliance and loss to follow-up. Even for such a 'broken' randomised trial, inference concerning causal effects is safer than that from data arising from an observational study that never involved random allocation in the first place.

Front matter

  • EPS volume 11 issue 2 Cover and Front matter

  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 October 2011, pp. f1-f10
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Instruments

Back matter

  • EPS volume 11 issue 1 Cover and Back matter

  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    07 August 2014, pp. b1-b2
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Other

Back matter

  • EPS volume 11 issue 2 Cover and Back matter

  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 October 2011, pp. b1-b2
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Instruments

Reports

Other

Index

Front matter

  • EPS volume 11 issue 4 Cover and Front matter

  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 October 2011, pp. f1-f12
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Back matter

  • EPS volume 11 issue 4 Cover and Back matter

  • Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    11 October 2011, pp. b1-b2
    • Article
      • You have access
    • PDF
    • Export citation

Page 3 of 3