Evidence from crossover trials: empirical evaluation and comparison against parallel arm trials

Dimitrios Lathyris; Thomas A Trikalinos; John P A Ioannidis

doi:10.1093/ije/dym001

Abstract

1 min read

Crossover designs may contribute evidence in a fifth of systematic reviews, but few meta-analyses make use of their full data. The results of crossover trials tend to agree with those of parallel arm trials, although there was a trend for more conservative treatment effect estimates in parallel arm trials.

Related publications

Article2017

Serum uric acid levels and multiple health outcomes: umbrella review of evidence from observational studies, randomised controlled trials, and Mendelian randomisation studies

Xue Li, Xiangrui Meng, Maria Timofeeva, Ioanna Tzoulaki, Konstantinos K. Tsilidis, John P A Ioannidis, Harry Campbell, Evropi Τheodoratou

Article2025

Reporting of cluster randomised crossover trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement with explanation and elaboration

Joanne E. McKenzie, Monica Taljaard, Karla Hemming, Sarah Arnup, Bruno Giraudeau, Sandra Eldridge, Richard Hooper, Brennan C Kahan, Tianjing Li, David Moher, Elizabeth L. Turner, Jeremy Grimshaw, Andrew Forbes

Article2012

Empirical Evaluation of Age Groups and Age-Subgroup Analyses in Pediatric Randomized Trials and Pediatric Meta-analyses

Despina G. Contopoulos‐Ioannidis, Iva Seto, Michele P Hamm, Denise Thomson, Lisa Hartling, John P A Ioannidis, Sarah Curtis, Evelyn Constantin, Gitanjali Batmanabane, Terry P. Klassen, Katrina Williams

Preprint2024

Reporting of cluster randomised crossover trials 2023: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement with explanation and elaboration

Article2007

Evaluation of networks of randomized trials

Georgia Salanti, Julian P. T. Higgins, A. E. Ades, John P A Ioannidis