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...
Главные авторы: | Nagendran, M, Pereira, T, Kiew, G, Altman, D, Maruthappu, M, Ioannidis, J, McCulloch, P |
---|---|
Формат: | Journal article |
Язык: | English |
Опубликовано: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2016
|
Схожие документы
-
Poor adherence of randomised trials in surgery to CONSORT guidelines for non-pharmacological treatments (NPT): a cross-sectional study
по: Nagendran, M, и др.
Опубликовано: (2013) -
Epidemiology of recent randomised controlled trials
по: Chan, A, и др.
Опубликовано: (2003) -
Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomised controlled trials
по: Chan, A, и др.
Опубликовано: (2003) -
Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals.
по: Chan, A, и др.
Опубликовано: (2005) -
THEORETICAL STUDY OF REGIONAL STRATEGIES: WHETHER THEY ARE NECESSARY?
по: VLADIMIR YURIEVICH Malov
Опубликовано: (2018-04-01)