Key result
Analysis of 15 randomized double-blind studies in acute severe asthma revealed that 12 studies failing to detect a significant difference in bronchodilatation had less than 60% power to detect a true 25% difference.
Why the study?
Do clinical trials in acute severe asthma have adequate statistical power to detect clinically meaningful differences in bronchodilatation?
Population
15 randomised double blind studies investigating the treatment of acute severe asthma published during 1974-84
Comparison
Various treatments for acute severe asthma vs Alternative treatments for acute severe asthma
Design
Systematic_review
Authors
Loading...
Clinicians should avoid equating treatments from negative underpowered asthma trials; challenges prior equivalence claims and demands larger RCTs.
Systematic Review (n=15)
Do clinical trials in acute severe asthma have adequate statistical power to detect clinically meaningful differences in bronchodilatation?
Many clinical trials in acute severe asthma are underpowered, leading to a high risk of type II errors when concluding that two treatments have equal efficacy.
Michael J. Ward (1986) conducted a systematic review in acute severe asthma (n=15). Treatment of acute severe asthma was evaluated on difference in bronchodilatation. Analysis of 15 randomized double-blind studies in acute severe asthma revealed that 12 studies failing to detect a significant difference in bronchodilatation had less than 60% power to detect a true 25% difference.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: