Baseline data in clinical trials

David C Burgess, Val J Gebski and Anthony C Keech
Med J Aust 2003; 179 (2): . || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2003.tb05447.x
Published online: 21 July 2003

Although reporting baseline data seems simple, it is crucial information for readers in judging the validity of a trial. Knowing the baseline characteristics of the trial participants allows readers to assess how closely these match patients seen in their own clinical practice, and therefore how generalisable the results of the trial will be (so-called external validity). Baseline characteristics also allow the success of randomisation to be assessed. In studies where important baseline factors appear well balanced, it is likely that any differences in outcome between the intervention and control groups are a real effect of treatment (one component of internal validity). For these reasons, the reporting of baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of each group is a requirement of the CONSORT statement.1 The item and its descriptor as they appear in the CONSORT checklist are shown in Box 1, and a checklist for baseline data is provided in Box 2.

  • NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW.


Competing interests:

None identified.

  • 1. Moher D, Schulz K, Altman D. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel group randomised trials. Lancet 2001; 357: 1191-1194.
  • 2. Beller EM, Gebski VJ, Keech AC. Randomisation in clinical trials. Med J Aust 2002; 177: 565-567. <eMJA full text>
  • 3. Friedman L, Furberg C, DeMets D. Fundamentals of clinical trials. 3rd ed. New York: Springer, 1998.
  • 4. Wise DG, Waldo AL, DiMarco JP, et al for AFFIRM Investigators. A comparison of rate control and rhythm control in patients with atrial fibrillation. N Engl J Med 2002: 347; 1825-1833.
  • 5. Pocock SJ, Assmann SE, Enos LE, Casten LE. Subgroup analysis, covariate adjustment and baseline comparisons in clinical trial reporting: current practice and problems. Stat Med 2002; 21: 2917-2930.
  • 6. Wallen L, Swahn E, Kontny F, et al for FRISC II Investigators. Invasive compared with non-invasive treatment in unstable coronary-artery disease: FRISC II prospective randomised multicentre study. Lancet 1999; 354: 708-715.
  • 7. Gebski V, Keech AC. Statistical methods in clinical trials. Med J Aust 2003; 178: 182-184. <eMJA full text>
  • 8. Matthews J. An introduction to randomised controlled clinical trials. London: Arnold, 2000.
  • 9. Altman DG, Dore CJ. Randomisation and baseline comparisons in clinical trials. Lancet 1990; 335: 149-152.
  • 10. Senn S. Testing for baseline balance in clinical trials. Stat Med 1994; 13: 1715-1726.


remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.