Skip to main content

Table 4 The difference in risk estimates derived by intention to treat (ITT), modified Intention to Treat (mITT), and per protocol (PP).

From: The effect of varying analytical methods on estimates of anti-malarial clinical efficacy

  Africa Thailand Overall
ITT – mITT    
Unadjusted 1.8% [-0.3–11.7]
IQR: 0.7–3.9
11.4% [2.1–31.8]a
IQR: 8.1–15.8
4.7% [-0.3–31.8]
IQR: 1.6–10.6
Adjusted 3.5% [-13.7–14.4]
IQR: 0.9–6.0
12.3% [4.1–31.8]a
IQR: 10.2–16.0
5.4% [-13.7–31.8]
IQR: 1.9–11.6
PP – mITT    
Unadjusted 0.1% [0.0–2.1]
IQR: 0–0.23
1.9% [0.0–10.6]a
IQR: 0.9–4.3
0.3% [0.0–10.6]
IQR: 0.1–1.9
Adjusted 3.2% [0.0–0.9]
IQR: 0.7–3.9
1.0% [0.0–6.9]b
IQR: 0.3–1.8
1.7% [0.0–30.9]
IQR: 0.5–5.6
  1. Values represent Median [Range], and InterQuartile Range (IQR)
  2. Comparison between Africa and Thailand: a p < 0.001; b p = 0.033