Very large treatment effects in randomised trials as an empirical marker to indicate whether subsequent trials are necessary: meta-epidemiological assessment
<strong>Objective:</strong> Most healthcare interventions provide modest benefits, but occasionally trials report very large improvements over existing treatments or inactive controls. This often leads to speculation that further trials may be unnecessary. We examined whether a very larg...
Principais autores: | Nagendran, M, Pereira, T, Kiew, G, Altman, D, Maruthappu, M, Ioannidis, J, McCulloch, P |
---|---|
Formato: | Journal article |
Idioma: | English |
Publicado em: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2016
|
Registros relacionados
-
Poor adherence of randomised trials in surgery to CONSORT guidelines for non-pharmacological treatments (NPT): a cross-sectional study
por: Nagendran, M, et al.
Publicado em: (2013) -
Epidemiology of recent randomised controlled trials
por: Chan, A, et al.
Publicado em: (2003) -
Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomised controlled trials
por: Chan, A, et al.
Publicado em: (2003) -
Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals.
por: Chan, A, et al.
Publicado em: (2005) -
THEORETICAL STUDY OF REGIONAL STRATEGIES: WHETHER THEY ARE NECESSARY?
por: VLADIMIR YURIEVICH Malov
Publicado em: (2018-04-01)