Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 3, 2026

Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
Published on: April 19, 2024
Interpretation of subgroup analyses in randomized trials: heterogeneity versus secondary interventions
Tyler J VanderWeele1, Mirjam J Knol
1Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA. tvanderw@hsph.harvard.edu
Abstract:
In randomized trials with subgroup analyses, the primary treatment or intervention of interest is randomized, but the secondary factors defining subgroups are not. This article clarifies when confounding is an issue in subgroup analyses. If investigators are interested simply in targeting subpopulations for intervention, control for confounding is not needed. If investigators are interested in intervening on the secondary factors that define the subgroups to increase the treatment effect or in attributing the subgroup differences to the secondary factors themselves, then confounding is relevant and must be controlled for. The authors demonstrate this point by using examples from published randomized trials.
Related Concept Videos
Test for Homogeneity
Randomized Experiments
Simple randomization
Simple...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...