Literature DB >> 23055180

Commentary: How the debate about comparative effectiveness research should impact the future of clinical trials.

Michael S Lauer1.   

Abstract

Comparative effectiveness research represents the kind of research that arguably more directly affects clinical practice and policy. It includes observational studies, clinical trials, and systematic syntheses of existing literature. In this commentary, I argue for the ongoing and critical role of randomization in comparative effectiveness, noting the key differences between practical and explanatory trials.
Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23055180     DOI: 10.1002/sim.5400

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  2 in total

1.  Evaluating the generalizability of a large streamlined cardiovascular trial: comparing hospitals and patients in the dual antiplatelet therapy study versus the National Cardiovascular Data Registry.

Authors:  Robert W Yeh; Matthew J Czarny; Sharon-Lise T Normand; Dean J Kereiakes; David R Holmes; Ralph G Brindis; W Douglas Weaver; John S Rumsfeld; Matthew T Roe; Sunghee Kim; Priscilla Driscoll-Shempp; Laura Mauri
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2014-11-16

2.  Patient-centered or 'central' patient: Raising the veil of ignorance over randomization.

Authors:  Anirban Basu
Journal:  Stat Med       Date:  2012-11-10       Impact factor: 2.373

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.