Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials

Int J Epidemiol. 2007 Aug;36(4):847-57. doi: 10.1093/ije/dym087. Epub 2007 May 21.

Abstract

Background: Randomized trials without reported adequate allocation concealment have been shown to overestimate the benefit of experimental interventions. We investigated the robustness of conclusions drawn from meta-analyses to exclusion of such trials.

Material: Random sample of 38 reviews from The Cochrane Library 2003, issue 2 and 32 other reviews from PubMed accessed in 2002. Eligible reviews presented a binary effect estimate from a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials as the first statistically significant result that supported a conclusion in favour of one of the interventions.

Methods: We assessed the methods sections of the trials in each included meta-analysis for adequacy of allocation concealment. We replicated each meta-analysis using the authors' methods but included only trials that had adequate allocation concealment. Conclusions were defined as not supported if our result was not statistically significant.

Results: Thirty-four of the 70 meta-analyses contained a mixture of trials with unclear or inadequate concealment as well as trials with adequate allocation concealment. Four meta-analyses only contained trials with adequate concealment, and 32, only trials with unclear or inadequate concealment. When only trials with adequate concealment were included, 48 of 70 conclusions (69%; 95% confidence interval: 56-79%) lost support. The loss of support mainly reflected loss of power (the total number of patients was reduced by 49%) but also a shift in the point estimate towards a less beneficial effect.

Conclusion: Two-thirds of conclusions in favour of one of the interventions were no longer supported if only trials with adequate allocation concealment were included.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Bias*
  • Data Interpretation, Statistical*
  • Double-Blind Method
  • Humans
  • Meta-Analysis as Topic*
  • Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic / methods*
  • Sensitivity and Specificity
  • Single-Blind Method
  • Treatment Outcome