Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-h4f6x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-28T04:25:31.897Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Reply to Herigon and Newland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2015

Stephanie A. Fritz ,
Bernard C. Camins ,
Jonathan Dukes  and
Gregory A. Storch
Stephanie A. Fritz*
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
Bernard C. Camins
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
Jonathan Dukes
Affiliation:
Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
Gregory A. Storch
Affiliation:
Department of Pediatrics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri
*
660 South Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8116, St. Louis, MO (fritz_s@kids.wustl.edu)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'

Information

Type
Letters to the Editor
Information
Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , February 2012 , pp. 208 - 210
Copyright
Copyright © The Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America 2012 

References

1. Herigon, JC, Newland, JG. The role of intention-to-treat analyses in randomized trials. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33:207–208 (in this issue).Google Scholar
2. Fritz, SA, Camins, BC, Eisenstein, KA, et al. Effectiveness of measures to eradicate Staphylococcus aureus carriage in patients with community-associated skin and soft-tissue infections: a randomized trial. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2011;32:872–880.Google Scholar
3. Altman, DG. Missing outcomes in randomized trials: addressing the dilemma. Open Med 2009;3:e51–e53.Google Scholar
4. Hollis, S, Campbell, F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ 1999;319:670–674.Google Scholar
5. Higgens, JPT, Green, S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Published 2011. Accessed November 1, 2011.Google Scholar
6. Moher, D, Schulz, KF, Altman, D. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. JAMA 2001;285:1987–1991.Google Scholar
7. Abraha, I, Montedori, A. Modified intention to treat reporting in randomised controlled trials: systematic review. BMJ 2010;340:c2697.Google Scholar
8. Schulz, KF, Altman, DG, Moher, D. CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 2010;152:726–732.Google Scholar
9. Hessol, NA, Schneider, M, Greenblatt, RM, et al. Retention of women enrolled in a prospective study of human immunodeficiency virus infection: impact of race, unstable housing, and use of human immunodeficiency virus therapy. Am J Epidemiol 2001;154:563–573.Google Scholar
10. Wood, AM, White, IR, Thompson, SG. Are missing outcome data adequately handled? a review of published randomized controlled trials in major medical journals. Clin Trials 2004;1:368–376.Google Scholar
11. Ellis, MW, Hospenthal, DR, Dooley, DP, Gray, PJ, Murray, CK. Natural history of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization and infection in soldiers. Clin Infect Dis 2004;39:971–979.Google Scholar
12. Mallory, C, Miles, MS, Holditch-Davis, D. Reciprocity and retaining African-American women with HIV in research. Appl Nurs Res 2002;15:35–41.Google Scholar