A complementary method far reporting randomized trials

被引:32
|
作者
Sim, I
Owens, DK
Lavori, PW
Rennels, GD
机构
[1] VA Hlth Care Syst, Palo Alto, CA USA
[2] Stanford Univ, Sch Med, Stanford Med Informat, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[3] Stanford Univ, Sch Med, Ctr Outcomes Res & Primary Care, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
[4] Stanford Univ, Sch Med, Dept Hlth Res & Policy, Div Biostat, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
关键词
electronic publishing; knowledge bases; clinical trials; meta-analysis;
D O I
10.1177/0272989X0002000408
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background. Randomized clinical trial (RCT) results are often difficult to find, interpret, or apply to clinical care. The authors propose that RCTs be reported into electronic knowledge bases-trial banks-in addition to being reported in text. What information should these trial-bank reports contain? Methods. Using the competency decomposition method, the authors specified the ideal trial-bank contents as the information necessary and sufficient for completing the task of systematic reviewing. Results. They decomposed the systematic reviewing task into four top-level tasks and 62 subtasks. 162 types of trial information were necessary and sufficient for completing these sub-tasks. These items relate to a trial's design, execution, administration, and results. Conclusion. Trial-bank publishing of these 162 items would capture into computer-understandable form all the trial information needed for critically appraising and synthesizing trial results. Decision-support systems that access shared, up-to-date trial banks could help clinicians manage, synthesize, and apply RCT evidence more effectively.
引用
收藏
页码:440 / 450
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Reporting of Randomized Clinical Trials Remains Far from Optimal
    J. Rick Turner
    [J]. Therapeutic Innovation & Regulatory Science, 2018, 52 : 137 - 139
  • [2] Reporting of Randomized Clinical Trials Remains Far from Optimal
    Turner, J. Rick
    [J]. THERAPEUTIC INNOVATION & REGULATORY SCIENCE, 2018, 52 (02) : 137 - 139
  • [3] Reporting Randomized Trials Reply
    Nevar, Pamela M.
    Rikkers, Layton F.
    Lillemoe, Keith D.
    [J]. ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2009, 250 (01) : 176 - 176
  • [4] Reporting of Factorial Randomized Trials
    Kahan, Brennan C.
    Hall, Sophie S.
    Beller, Elaine M.
    Birchenall, Megan
    Chan, An-Wen
    Elbourne, Diana
    Little, Paul
    Fletcher, John
    Golub, Robert M.
    Goulao, Beatriz
    Hopewell, Sally
    Islam, Nazrul
    Zwarenstein, Merrick
    Juszczak, Edmund
    Montgomery, Alan A.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2023, 330 (21): : 2106 - 2114
  • [5] Quality of reporting in randomized trials
    Sataloff, Robert T.
    [J]. ENT-EAR NOSE & THROAT JOURNAL, 2010, 89 (04) : 150 - 150
  • [6] The consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) - Guidelines for reporting randomized trials
    Bennett, JA
    [J]. NURSING RESEARCH, 2005, 54 (02) : 128 - 132
  • [7] Randomized trials in alternative/complementary medicine
    Charlton, BG
    [J]. QJM-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2002, 95 (10) : 643 - 645
  • [8] SAFETY REPORTING IN RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS
    Yeahia, Rubaya
    Gennarelli, Renee
    Morgan, Daniel J.
    Korenstein, Deborah R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2020, 35 (SUPPL 1) : S264 - S264
  • [9] Reporting and Interpretation of Randomized Clinical Trials
    Bauchner, Howard
    Golub, Robert M.
    Fontanarosa, Phil B.
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2019, 322 (08): : 732 - 735
  • [10] The quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials
    McGowan, David R.
    Norris, Joseph M.
    Bennett, Grace L.
    [J]. CURRENT MEDICAL RESEARCH AND OPINION, 2015, 31 (08) : 1609 - 1610