Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2020 Jan 9;19(1):6.
doi: 10.1186/s12904-019-0506-6.

Are the MORECare guidelines on reporting of attrition in palliative care research populations appropriate? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Anna Oriani  1 , Lesley Dunleavy  2 , Paul Sharples  3 , Guillermo Perez Algorta  4 , Nancy J Preston  2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Are the MORECare guidelines on reporting of attrition in palliative care research populations appropriate? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Anna Oriani et al. BMC Palliat Care. .

Abstract

Background: Palliative care trials have higher rates of attrition. The MORECare guidance recommends applying classifications of attrition to report attrition to help interpret trial results. The guidance separates attrition into three categories: attrition due to death, illness or at random. The aim of our study is to apply the MORECare classifications on reported attrition rates in trials.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted and attrition classifications retrospectively applied. Four databases, EMBASE; Medline, CINHAL and PsychINFO, were searched for randomised controlled trials of palliative care populations from 01.01.2010 to 08.10.2016. This systematic review is part of a larger review looking at recruitment to randomised controlled trials in palliative care, from January 1990 to early October 2016. We ran random-effect models with and without moderators and descriptive statistics to calculate rates of missing data.

Results: One hundred nineteen trials showed a total attrition of 29% (95% CI 28 to 30%). We applied the MORECare classifications of attrition to the 91 papers that contained sufficient information. The main reason for attrition was attrition due to death with a weighted mean of 31.6% (SD 27.4) of attrition cases. Attrition due to illness was cited as the reason for 17.6% (SD 24.5) of participants. In 50.8% (SD 26.5) of cases, the attrition was at random. We did not observe significant differences in missing data between total attrition in non-cancer patients (26%; 95% CI 18-34%) and cancer patients (24%; 95% CI 20-29%). There was significantly more missing data in outpatients (29%; 95% CI 22-36%) than inpatients (16%; 95% CI 10-23%). We noted increased attrition in trials with longer durations.

Conclusion: Reporting the cause of attrition is useful in helping to understand trial results. Prospective reporting using the MORECare classifications should improve our understanding of future trials.

Keywords: MORECare guidelines; Randomised controlled trials; attrition; missing data; palliative care; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Nancy Preston is a member of the editorial board (Associate Editor) of BMC Palliative Care. She had no role in the editorial process of this article.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA study flow diagram
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Preston NJ, Fayers P, Walters SJ, Pilling M, Grande GE, Short V, et al. Recommendations for managing missing data, attrition and response shift in palliative and end-of-life care research: part of the MORECare research method guidance on statistical issues. Palliat Med. 2013;27:899–907. doi: 10.1177/0269216313486952. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Wood AM, White IR, Thompson SG. Are missing outcome data adequately handled? A review of published randomized controlled trials in major medical journals. Clinical Trials. 2004;1(4):368–376. doi: 10.1191/1740774504cn032oa. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Zhang Y, Alyass A, Vanniyasingam T, Sadeghirad B, Florez ID, Pichika SC, et al. A systematic survey of the methods literature on the reporting quality and optimal methods of handling participants with missing outcome data for continuous outcomes in randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;88:67–80. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.05.016. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Evans CJ, Benalia H, Preston NJ, Grande G, Gysels M, Short V, et al. The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research: the MORECare international consensus workshop. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2013;46(6):925–937. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.01.010. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bruera E, Higginson I, von Gunten CF, Morita T. Textbook of palliative medicine and supportive care: CRC publisher. 2015.

MeSH terms