Table 5.
– Subgroups identified by the IPD‐SIDES method when applied to the pooled acupuncture dataset
| Subgroupsa | n | Treatment Effect (95% Confidence Interval, CI) | Interaction Effect | Unadjusted P‐Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Outcome: Short‐term PCS | ||||
| Overall treatment effect (95% CI): 3.75 (3.20, 4.30) | ||||
| Candidate 1 | ||||
| MCS > 51.4 | 1531 | 4.34 (3.43, 5.25) | 0.94 | 0.086 |
| MCS ≤ 51.4 | 2314 | 3.40 (2.72, 4.09) | ||
| Candidate 2 | ||||
| MCS > 51.4 and PCS ≤ 35.9 | 919 | 5.44 (4.24, 6.63) | 2.38 | 0.016 |
| MCS > 51.4 and PCS > 35.9 | 612 | 3.05 (1.90, 4.21) | ||
| Candidate 3 | ||||
| Age ≤ 43 | 1170 | 4.93 (3.90, 5.96) | 1.69 | 0.005 |
| Age > 43 | 2675 | 3.24 (2.59, 3.88) | ||
| Outcome: Short‐term MCS | ||||
| Overall treatment effect (95% CI): 2.50 (1.83, 3.17) | ||||
| Candidate 1 | ||||
| MCS ≤ 54.5 | 2701 | 3.29 (2.47, 4.10) | 2.65 | 0.001 |
| MCS > 54.5 | 1144 | 0.64 (−0.21, 1.48) |
a
The first row of each candidate subgroup is the selected subgroup with enhanced treatment effect. The second row is the disregarded subgroup.