Literature DB >> 11223318

Are randomized clinical trials good for us (in the short term)? Evidence for a "trial effect".

D A Braunholtz1, S J Edwards, R J Lilford.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether there is evidence that randomized controlled trials are systematically beneficial, or harmful, for patients. In other words, is there a "trial effect"? If so, to examine whether the evidence sheds light on the likely sources of the difference in outcomes.
METHODS: Systematic review of the literature.
RESULTS: We set out in some detail potential sources of a "trial effect" and potential biases. We found only 14 research articles (covering more than 21 trials) with relevant primary data. We extracted, with difficulty, quantitative data-sets from the articles, and classified these according to likely source of any apparent trial effect. The categories used were: differences in prognosis; superior treatment in the trial; and "protocol/Hawthorne effect" (benefit from improved routine care within a trial). ANALYSIS: The evidence available is limited in breadth (coming largely from cancer trials) and quality, as well as quantity. There is weak evidence to suggest that clinical trials have a positive effect on the outcome of participants. This does not appear to depend strongly on the trial demonstrating that an experimental treatment is superior. However, benefit to participants is less evident where scope for a "protocol/Hawthorne effect" was apparently limited (because there was no effective routine treatment or because the comparison group also received protocol care). A form of bias, arising if clinicians who tend to recruit to trials also tend to be better clinicians, could also explain these results.
CONCLUSION: While the evidence is not conclusive, it is more likely that clinical trials have a positive rather than a negative effect on the outcome of patients. In the limited data available, the effect seems to be larger in trials where an effective treatment already exists and is included in the trial protocol. RECOMMENDATION: That carefully researched treatment protocols, and monitoring of outcomes, be used for all patients, not just those in trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11223318     DOI: 10.1016/s0895-4356(00)00305-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  146 in total

1.  Britain's gift: a "Medline" of synthesised evidence.

Authors:  R Smith; I Chalmers
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2001 Dec 22-29

Review 2.  What to do about poor clinical performance in clinical trials.

Authors:  Su Mason; Jon Nicholl; Richard Lilford
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-02-16

Review 3.  Ethics of clinical trials from a bayesian and decision analytic perspective: whose equipoise is it anyway?

Authors:  Richard J Lilford
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-05-03

4.  Primary care research after the Act: why commissioners and academia need to work together.

Authors:  Peter Brindle
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  Population Diversity Challenge the External Validity of the European Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass and Sleeve Gastrectomy.

Authors:  Guilherme S Mazzini; Jad Khoraki; Matthew G Browning; Bernardo M Pessoa; Luke G Wolfe; Guilherme M Campos
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 4.129

6.  fMRI tracks reductions in repetitive behaviors in autism: two case studies.

Authors:  Gabriel S Dichter; Linmarie Sikich; Steve Mahorney; Jennifer N Felder; Kristen S L Lam; Lauren Turner-Brown; James Bodfish
Journal:  Neurocase       Date:  2010-02-22       Impact factor: 0.881

7.  Open pneumoperitoneum because of quality assurance.

Authors:  P B Millat
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Participants in research.

Authors:  David L Sackett
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-05-21

9.  Participating in the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS): a qualitative study of patients' experiences.

Authors:  Julia Lawton; Anna Fox; Charles Fox; Ann Louise Kinmonth
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 5.386

10.  Adherence to instructions and fluctuation of force magnitude in cervical headgear therapy.

Authors:  Tuula Talvitie; Mika Helminen; Susanna Karsila; Reeta Varho; Luca Signorelli; Timo Peltomäki
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2018-11-19       Impact factor: 2.079

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.