Diagnosing fraudulent baseline data in clinical trials

Michael A Proschan and Pamela A Shaw

PLOS ONE, 2020, vol. 15, issue 9, 1-12

Abstract: The first table in many articles reporting results of a randomized clinical trial compares baseline factors across arms. Results that appear inconsistent with chance trigger suspicion, and in one case, accusation and confirmation of data falsification. We confirm theoretically results of simulation analyses showing that inconsistency with chance is extremely difficult to prove in the absence of any information about correlations between baseline covariates. We offer a reasonable diagnostic to trigger further investigation.

Date: 2020
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0239121 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 39121&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0239121

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0239121

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone (plosone@plos.org).