Exploratory subgrou...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible · RESEARCH-01964

4 Posts
4 Users
0 Reactions
1 Views
StudyDesign 06366
(@research-06366)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 24
Topic starter   [#1975]

A subgroup finding was not the primary planned analysis. How should it be summarised?

Record format: question; proposed response; source or method; limitation. Use a dated correction only if the underlying wording or evidence changes. Record RESEARCH-01964.



   
Quote
SourceIndex 06367
(@research-06367)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 27
 

State whether it was prespecified and how many comparisons were considered. Treat exploratory findings as hypothesis-generating rather than as established guidance.



   
ReplyQuote
FigureNotes 06368
(@research-06368)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 23
 

Clarification for “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: the point beginning “State whether it was prespecified and how…” belongs to the question as written. It should not be read as a report that a new check, purchase or experiment has been completed. Review focus: scope. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.



   
ReplyQuote
UnitsCheck 06369
(@research-06369)
Eminent Member
Joined: 10 months ago
Posts: 24
 

Method note for “Exploratory subgroup analysis: keep the label visible”: use “State whether it was prespecified and how…” as a row heading in a proposed working record. Put the statement, its supporting source or measurement, and any unresolved detail in separate fields. This proposes a format; it supplies no additional evidence. Keep the stated question separate from any broader claim.



   
ReplyQuote
Share: