Literature DB >> 14989285

The importance of preservation of the ethical principle of equipoise in the design of clinical trials: relative impact of the methodological quality domains on the treatment effect in randomized controlled trials.

Benjamin Djulbegovic1, Alan Cantor, Mike Clarke.   

Abstract

Previous research has identified methodological problems in the design and conduct of randomized trials that could, if left unaddressed, lead to biased results. In this report we discuss one such problem, inadequate control intervention, and argue that it can be by far the most important design characteristic of randomized trials in overestimating the effect of new treatments. Current guidelines for the design and reporting of randomized trials, such as the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) statement, do not address the choice of the comparator intervention. We argue that an adequate control intervention can be selected if people designing a trial explicitly take into consideration the ethical principle of equipoise, also known as "the uncertainty principle."

Entities:  

Keywords:  Analytical Approach; Biomedical and Behavioral Research; CONSORT Group; Empirical Approach

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14989285     DOI: 10.1080/714906103

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Account Res        ISSN: 0898-9621            Impact factor:   2.622


  14 in total

1.  Extending clinical equipoise to phase 1 trials involving patients: unresolved problems.

Authors:  James A Anderson; Jonathan Kimmelman
Journal:  Kennedy Inst Ethics J       Date:  2010-03

2.  Evaluation of new treatments in radiation oncology: are they better than standard treatments?

Authors:  Heloisa P Soares; Ambuj Kumar; Stephanie Daniels; Suzanne Swann; Alan Cantor; Iztok Hozo; Mike Clark; Fadila Serdarevic; Clement Gwede; Andy Trotti; Benjamin Djulbegovic
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2005-02-23       Impact factor: 56.272

3.  Are experimental treatments for cancer in children superior to established treatments? Observational study of randomised controlled trials by the Children's Oncology Group.

Authors:  Ambuj Kumar; Heloisa Soares; Robert Wells; Mike Clarke; Iztok Hozo; Archie Bleyer; Gregory Reaman; Iain Chalmers; Benjamin Djulbegovic
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-11-18

4.  SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials.

Authors:  An-Wen Chan; Jennifer M Tetzlaff; Peter C Gøtzsche; Douglas G Altman; Howard Mann; Jesse A Berlin; Kay Dickersin; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Kenneth F Schulz; Wendy R Parulekar; Karmela Krleza-Jeric; Andreas Laupacis; David Moher
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2013-01-08

5.  Evidence-based medicine in obstetrics: can levels B and C recommendations be elevated to level A recommendations?

Authors:  Suneet P Chauhan; Eugene Chang; Brian Brost; Barbara Assel; Jason Baxter; James A Smith; Robert Grobman; Vincenzo Berghella; James A Scardo; Everett F Magann; John C Morrison
Journal:  Obstet Med       Date:  2009-05-22

6.  Those who have the gold make the evidence: how the pharmaceutical industry biases the outcomes of clinical trials of medications.

Authors:  Joel Lexchin
Journal:  Sci Eng Ethics       Date:  2011-02-15       Impact factor: 3.525

7.  Treatment success in cancer: new cancer treatment successes identified in phase 3 randomized controlled trials conducted by the National Cancer Institute-sponsored cooperative oncology groups, 1955 to 2006.

Authors:  Benjamin Djulbegovic; Ambuj Kumar; Heloisa P Soares; Iztok Hozo; Gerold Bepler; Mike Clarke; Charles L Bennett
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2008-03-24

8.  The paradox of equipoise: the principle that drives and limits therapeutic discoveries in clinical research.

Authors:  Benjamin Djulbegovic
Journal:  Cancer Control       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 3.302

Review 9.  Industry sponsorship and research outcome.

Authors:  Andreas Lundh; Joel Lexchin; Barbara Mintzes; Jeppe B Schroll; Lisa Bero
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-02-16

10.  The development and description of the comparison group in the Look AHEAD trial.

Authors:  Jacqueline Ann Wesche-Thobaben
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 2.486

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.