Challenging issues in randomised controlled trials

被引:44
作者
Nichol, A. D. [1 ,2 ]
Bailey, M.
Cooper, D. J. [2 ]
机构
[1] Monash Univ, Australian & New Zealand Intens Care Res Ctr, Sch Publ Hlth & Prevent Med, Melbourne, Vic 3004, Australia
[2] Alfred Hosp, Melbourne, Vic 3004, Australia
来源
INJURY-INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE CARE OF THE INJURED | 2010年 / 41卷
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Randomised controlled trial; Intensive care; Research; Education; TRAUMATIC BRAIN-INJURY; CONSORT STATEMENT; QUALITY; RESUSCITATION; SALINE; SIZE;
D O I
10.1016/j.injury.2010.03.033
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
What this topic is about: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the most rigorous way of determining whether a cause-effect relation exists between treatment and outcome and are an integral component in the hierarchy of evidence which guide current clinical practice. Whether ensuring the success of a RCT or interpreting the medical literature, it is important to understand the key components of RCT design to assess their quality and therefore the weight which should be attributed to its findings. This article will highlight some of these key components by using a number of ongoing trauma studies being coordinated by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University. Common problems and challenges: The quality of many RCTs could be improved by avoiding some common pitfalls, such as (i) unclear hypotheses and multiple objectives, (ii) poor selection of endpoints, (iii) inappropriate subject selection criteria, (iv) non-clinically relevant or feasible treatment/intervention regimens, (v) inadequate randomisation, stratification, blinding, (vi) lack of stratification in small RCTs (vii) inadequate blinding of trials, (viii) insufficient sample size/power, (ix) failure to use intention to treat analysis and (x) failure to anticipate common practical problems encountered during the conduct of a RCT. Tips for researchers: The RCTs most likely to be funded and/or be of high quality always address these issues. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:20 / 23
页数:4
相关论文
共 17 条
[1]  
Altman DG, 1996, BRIT MED J, V313, P570
[2]  
[Anonymous], JAMA
[3]   Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials - The CONSORT statement [J].
Begg, C ;
Cho, M ;
Eastwood, S ;
Horton, R ;
Moher, D ;
Olkin, I ;
Pitkin, R ;
Rennie, D ;
Schulz, KF ;
Simel, D ;
Stroup, DF .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1996, 276 (08) :637-639
[4]  
*BRAIN TRAUM FDN, 2007, J NEUROTRAUM, P24
[5]   Lack of effect of induction of hypothermia after acute brain injury. [J].
Clifton, GL ;
Miller, ER ;
Choi, SC ;
Levin, HS ;
McCauley, S ;
Smith, KR ;
Muizelaar, JP ;
Wagner, FC ;
Marion, DW ;
Luerssen, TG ;
Chesnut, RM ;
Schwartz, M .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2001, 344 (08) :556-563
[6]   Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. [J].
Concato, J ;
Shah, N ;
Horwitz, RI .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2000, 342 (25) :1887-1892
[7]   Prehospital hypertonic saline resuscitation of patients with hypotension and severe traumatic brain injury - A randomized controlled trial [J].
Cooper, DJ ;
Myles, PS ;
McDermott, FT ;
Murray, LJ ;
Laidlaw, J ;
Cooper, G ;
Tremayne, AB ;
Bernard, SS ;
Ponsford, J .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2004, 291 (11) :1350-1357
[8]   Size and quality of randomised controlled trials in head injury: review of published studies [J].
Dickinson, K ;
Bunn, F ;
Wentz, R ;
Edwards, P ;
Roberts, I .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2000, 320 (7245) :1308-1311
[9]   IMPORTANCE OF BETA, TYPE-II ERROR AND SAMPLE-SIZE IN DESIGN AND INTERPRETATION OF RANDOMIZED CONTROL TRIAL - SURVEY OF 71 NEGATIVE TRIALS [J].
FREIMAN, JA ;
CHALMERS, TC ;
SMITH, H ;
KUEBLER, RR .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1978, 299 (13) :690-694
[10]   The randomized controlled trial gets a middle-aged checkup [J].
Jadad, AR ;
Rennie, D .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1998, 279 (04) :319-320