Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Study Population

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Fundamentals of Clinical Trials

  • 14k Accesses

Abstract

Defining the study population is an integral part of posing the primary question. It is not enough to claim that an intervention is or is not effective without describing the type of participant on which the intervention was tested. The description requires specification of criteria for eligibility. This chapter focuses on how to define the study population. In addition, it considers two questions. First, to what extent will the results of the trial be generalizable to a broader population? Second, what impact does selection of eligibility criteria have on participant recruitment, or, more generally, study feasibility? This issue is also discussed in Chap. 10.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. CONSORT. http://www.consort-statement.org

  2. Van Spall HGC, Toren A, Kiss A, Fowler RA. Eligibility criteria of randomized controlled trials published in high-impact general medical journals: a systematic sampling review. JAMA 2007;297:1233–1240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. Preliminary report on effects of photocoagulation therapy. Am J Ophthalmol 1976;81:383–396.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Diabetic Retinopathy Study Research Group. Photocoagulation treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy: the second report of diabetic retinopathy study findings. Ophthalmology 1978;85:82–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fraser DW, Tsai TR, Orenstein W, et al. Legionnaires’ Disease: description of an epidemic of pneumonia. N Engl J Med 1977;297:1189–1197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents. Effects of treatment on morbidity in hypertension: results in patients with diastolic blood pressures averaging 115 through 129 mm Hg. JAMA 1967;202:1028–1034.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Veterans Administration Cooperative Study Group on Antihypertensive Agents. Effects of treatment on morbidity in hypertension: II. Results in patients with diastolic blood pressure averaging 90 through 114 mm Hg. JAMA 1970;213:1143–1152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hypertension Detection and Follow-up Program Cooperative Group. Five-year findings of the hypertension detection and follow-up program. 1. Reduction in mortality of persons with high blood pressure, including mild hypertension. JAMA 1979;242:2562–2571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Ridker PM, Danielson E, Fonseca FAH, et al. Rosuvastatin to prevent vascular events in men and women with elevated C-reactive protein. N Engl J Med 2008;359:2195–2207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sondik EJ, Brown BW, Jr., Silvers A. High risk subjects and the cost of large field trials. J Chronic Dis 1974;27:177–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Tunis SR, Stryer DB, Clancy CM. Practical clinical trials: increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. JAMA 2003;290:1624–1632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Douglas PS. Gender, cardiology, and optimal medical care. Circulation 1986;74:917–919.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bennett JC, for the Board on Health Sciences Policy of the Institute of Medicine. Inclusion of women in clinical trials – policies for population subgroups. N Engl J Med 1993;329:288–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Freedman LS, Simon R, Foulkes MA, et al. Inclusion of women and minorities in clinical trials and the NIH Revitalization Act of 1993 – the perspective of NIH clinical trialists. Control Clin Trials 1995;16:277–285.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. NIH Policy and Guidelines on the Inclusion of Women and Minorities as Subjects in Clinical Research – Amended, October, 2001. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/funding/women_min/guidelines_amended_10_2001.htm

  16. Horwitz O, Wilbek E. Effect of tuberculosis infection on mortality risk. Am Rev Respir Dis 1971;104:643–655.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Wilhelmsen L, Ljungberg S, Wedel H, Werko L. A comparison between participants and non-participants in a primary preventive trial. J Chronic Dis 1976;29:331–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Smith P, Arnesen H. Mortality in non-consenters in a post-myocardial infarction trial. J Intern Med 1990;228:253–256.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Pedersen TR. The Norwegian Multicenter Study of timolol after myocardial infarction. Circulation 1983;67(suppl 1):I-49–I-53.

    Google Scholar 

  20. CASS Principal Investigators and Their Associates. Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery. Comparability of entry characteristics and survival in randomized patients and nonrandomized patients meeting randomization criteria. J Am Coll Cardiol 1984;3:114–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Antithrombotic Trialists’ Collaboration. Collaborative meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in high risk patients. BMJ 2002;324:71–86; correction BMJ 2002;324:141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Steering Committee of the Physicians’ Health Study Research Group. Final report on the aspirin component of the ongoing Physicians’ Health Study. N Engl J Med 1989;321:129–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Peto R, Gray R, Collins R, et al. Randomized trial of prophylactic daily aspirin in British male doctors. Br Med J 1988;296:313–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ridker PM, Cook NR, Lee I-M, et al. A randomized trial of low-dose aspirin in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in women. N Engl J Med 2005;352:1293–1304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Berger JS, Roncaglioni MC, Avanzini F, et al. Aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events in women and men: a sex-specific meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 2006;295:306–313; correction JAMA 2006;295:2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Benedict GW. LRC Coronary Prevention Trial: Baltimore. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1979;25:685–687.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bethesda, MD, USA

    Lawrence M. Friedman

  2. School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, USA

    Curt D. Furberg

  3. Department of Biostatistics & Medical Informatics, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, USA

    David L. DeMets

Authors
  1. Lawrence M. Friedman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Curt D. Furberg
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David L. DeMets
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lawrence M. Friedman .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Friedman, L.M., Furberg, C.D., DeMets, D.L. (2010). Study Population. In: Fundamentals of Clinical Trials. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1586-3_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation