Literature DB >> 3721720

Clinical trials versus intuition in evaluating the results of laser photocoagulation.

D Wong, R K Blach.   

Abstract

Clinical trials are often used to evaluate the efficacy of a given treatment. The results of clinical trials however do not always agree with a clinician's experience or intuition. The merits and demerits of Clinical Trials versus Intuition are discussed by using the laser photocoagulation trials of Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy, Central serous retinopathy, Branch Vein Occlusion (treatment for macular oedema), Senile Macular Degeneration, and Pigment Epithelial Detachment. A model based on Intuition is used to explain the discrepancy between the results of the British and American trials of Branch Vein Occlusion and Senile Macular Degeneration. Proposals on the presentation of Clinical Trials and the place of Intuition are made.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1986        PMID: 3721720     DOI: 10.1007/bf00159835

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Ophthalmol        ISSN: 0165-5701            Impact factor:   2.031


  5 in total

1.  Treatment of senile disciform macular degeneration: a single-blind randomised trial by argon laser photocoagulation. The Moorfields Macular Study Group.

Authors: 
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1982-12       Impact factor: 4.638

2.  Retinal pigment epithelial detachments in the elderly: a controlled trial of argon laser photocoagulation.

Authors: 
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1982-01       Impact factor: 4.638

3.  Argon laser photocoagulation in the treatment of central serous retinopathy.

Authors:  P Leaver; C Williams
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1979-10       Impact factor: 4.638

4.  Photocoagulation treatment of proliferative diabetic retinopathy: the second report of diabetic retinopathy study findings.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ophthalmology       Date:  1978-01       Impact factor: 12.079

5.  Retinal branch vein occlusion: a study of argon laser photocoagulation in the treatment of macular oedema.

Authors:  J S Shilling; C A Jones
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  1984-03       Impact factor: 4.638

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.