Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T04:34:09.552Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Reply to Herigon and Newland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Stephanie A. Fritz*
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
Bernard C. Camins
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
Jonathan Dukes
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
Gregory A. Storch
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
*
660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8116, St. Louis, MO ([email protected])
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Letters to the Editor
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2012

References

1.Herigon, JC, Newland, JG. The role of intention-to-treat analyses in randomized trials. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33:207208 (in this issue).Google Scholar
2.Fritz, SA, Camins, BC, Eisenstein, KA, et al. Effectiveness of measures to eradicate Staphylococcus aureus carriage in patients with community-associated skin and soft-tissue infections: a randomized trial. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2011;32:872880.Google Scholar
3.Altman, DG. Missing outcomes in randomized trials: addressing the dilemma. Open Med 2009;3:e51e53.Google Scholar
4.Hollis, S, Campbell, F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ 1999;319:670674.Google Scholar
5.Higgens, JPT, Green, S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Published 2011. Accessed November 1, 2011.Google Scholar
6.Moher, D, Schulz, KF, Altman, D. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA 2001;285:19871991.Google Scholar
7.Abraha, I, Montedori, A. Modified intention to treat reporting in randomised controlled trials: systematic review. BMJ 2010;340:c2697.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Schulz, KF, Altman, DG, Moher, D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 2010;152:726732.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Hessol, NA, Schneider, M, Greenblatt, RM, et al. Retention of women enrolled in a prospective study of human immunodeficiency virus infection: impact of race, unstable housing, and use of human immunodeficiency virus therapy. Am J Epidemiol 2001;154:563573.Google Scholar
10.Wood, AM, White, IR, Thompson, SG. Are missing outcome data adequately handled? a review of published randomized controlled trials in major medical journals. Clin Trials 2004;1:368376.Google Scholar
11.Ellis, MW, Hospenthal, DR, Dooley, DP, Gray, PJ, Murray, CK. Natural history of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization and infection in soldiers. Clin Infect Dis 2004;39:971979.Google Scholar
12.Mallory, C, Miles, MS, Holditch-Davis, D. Reciprocity and retaining African-American women with HIV in research. Appl Nurs Res 2002;15:3541.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed