Literature DB >> 12133163

Determination of the clinical importance of study results.

Malcolm Man-Son-Hing1, Andreas Laupacis, Keith O'Rourke, Frank J Molnar, Jeffery Mahon, Karen B Y Chan, George Wells.   

Abstract

Formal statistical methods for analyzing clinical trial data are widely accepted by the medical community. Unfortunately, the interpretation and reporting of trial results from the perspective of clinical importance has not received similar emphasis. This imbalance promotes the historical tendency to consider clinical trial results that are statistically significant as also clinically important, and conversely, those with statistically insignificant results as being clinically unimportant. In this paper, we review the present state of knowledge in the determination of the clinical importance of study results. This work also provides a simple, systematic method for determining the clinical importance of study results. It uses the relationship between the point estimate of the treatment effect (with its associated confidence interval) and the estimate of the smallest treatment effect that would lead to a change in a patient's management. The possible benefits of this approach include enabling clinicians to more easily interpret the results of clinical trials from a clinical perspective, and promoting a more rational approach to the design of prospective clinical trials.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12133163      PMCID: PMC1495062          DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2002.11111.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gen Intern Med        ISSN: 0884-8734            Impact factor:   5.128


  47 in total

Review 1.  Antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation.

Authors:  G W Albers; J E Dalen; A Laupacis; W J Manning; P Petersen; D E Singer
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 2.  Antithrombotic and thrombolytic therapy for ischemic stroke.

Authors:  G W Albers; P Amarenco; J D Easton; R L Sacco; P Teal
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 9.410

Review 3.  The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials.

Authors:  D Moher; K F Schulz; D G Altman
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2001-04-17       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 4.  Minimal clinically important differences: review of methods.

Authors:  G Wells; D Beaton; B Shea; M Boers; L Simon; V Strand; P Brooks; P Tugwell
Journal:  J Rheumatol       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 4.666

5.  How well is the clinical importance of study results reported? An assessment of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  K B Chan; M Man-Son-Hing; F J Molnar; A Laupacis
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2001-10-30       Impact factor: 8.262

6.  Prevention of thromboembolism in atrial fibrillation. A meta-analysis of trials of anticoagulants and antiplatelet drugs.

Authors:  J B Segal; R L McNamara; M R Miller; N Kim; S N Goodman; N R Powe; K A Robinson; E B Bass
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 5.128

7.  Randomised, double blind placebo controlled trial of pentoxifylline in the treatment of venous leg ulcers.

Authors:  J J Dale; C V Ruckley; D R Harper; B Gibson; E A Nelson; R J Prescott
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-10-02

8.  Validation of clinical classification schemes for predicting stroke: results from the National Registry of Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  B F Gage; A D Waterman; W Shannon; M Boechler; M W Rich; M J Radford
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2001-06-13       Impact factor: 56.272

9.  Significance of significant.

Authors: 
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1968-05-30       Impact factor: 91.245

10.  Determining minimally important changes in generic and disease-specific health-related quality of life questionnaires in clinical trials of rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  M Kosinski; S Z Zhao; S Dedhiya; J T Osterhaus; J E Ware
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2000-07
View more
  30 in total

1.  The minimal important difference in the 6-minute walk test for patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension.

Authors:  Stephen C Mathai; Milo A Puhan; Diana Lam; Robert A Wise
Journal:  Am J Respir Crit Care Med       Date:  2012-06-21       Impact factor: 21.405

Review 2.  Systematic review and meta-analysis: techniques and a guide for the academic surgeon.

Authors:  Kevin Phan; David H Tian; Christopher Cao; Deborah Black; Tristan D Yan
Journal:  Ann Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2015-03

3.  Acute rhinosinusitis and systemic corticosteroids.

Authors:  Kingsley N Ukwaja
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 8.262

4.  EHR-Based Clinical Trials: The Next Generation of Evidence.

Authors:  Khaled Abdel-Kader; Manisha Jhamb
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2020-02-24       Impact factor: 8.237

5.  Treatment Effect on Recidivism for Juveniles Who Have Sexually Offended: a Multilevel Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Ellis Ter Beek; Anouk Spruit; Chris H Z Kuiper; Rachel E A van der Rijken; Jan Hendriks; Geert Jan J M Stams
Journal:  J Abnorm Child Psychol       Date:  2018-04

6.  Minimal Important Change and Minimal Detectable Change in Activities of Daily Living in Community-Living Older People.

Authors:  J J Suijker; M van Rijn; G Ter Riet; E P Moll van Charante; S E de Rooij; B M Buurman
Journal:  J Nutr Health Aging       Date:  2017       Impact factor: 4.075

7.  The Minimal Important Difference in Borg Dyspnea Score in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension.

Authors:  Rubina M Khair; Chisom Nwaneri; Rachel L Damico; Todd Kolb; Paul M Hassoun; Stephen C Mathai
Journal:  Ann Am Thorac Soc       Date:  2016-06

8.  Kidney function and progression of coronary artery calcium in community-dwelling older adults (from the Rancho Bernardo Study).

Authors:  Simerjot Kaur Jassal; Michel Chonchol; Gail A Laughlin; Kevin M Cummins; Gerard Smits; Caroline K Kramer; Joachim H Ix; Elizabeth Barrett-Connor
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2012-08-08       Impact factor: 2.778

Review 9.  Maintaining clarity: Review of maintenance therapy in non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  Kristen R Dearing; Ashish Sangal; Glen J Weiss
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-05-10

10.  Alignment between outcomes and minimal clinically important differences in the Dutch type 2 diabetes mellitus guideline and healthcare professionals' preferences.

Authors:  Marloes Dankers; Marjorie H J M G Nelissen-Vrancken; Bertien H Hart; Anke C Lambooij; Liset van Dijk; Aukje K Mantel-Teeuwisse
Journal:  Pharmacol Res Perspect       Date:  2021-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.