 |
|
Generalizability of the Results of Randomized Trials
Noel S. Weiss, MD, DrPH;
Thomas D. Koepsell, MD, MPH;
Bruce M. Psaty, MD, MPH
Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(2):133-135.
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
The CONSORT (Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials) guidelines,1 now endorsed by many major medical journals (including the Archives of Internal Medicine), chiefly highlight aspects of randomized trial methods that bear on a trial's internal validity—that is, whether the trial reaches the correct conclusion regarding individuals actually enrolled. Among these features are whether assignments are truly made at random, whether the health outcomes of concern are monitored accurately in all participants, and whether a large enough number of such outcomes occur in the participants to yield statistically precise results.
The results of such trials are most directly generalizable to study-eligible patients who would have enrolled and who receive the same interventions provided in the trial setting. However, as Dhruva and Redberg illustrate in this issue of the Archives,2 the demographic profile of a trial's . . . [Full Text of this Article] NATURE OF THE TREATMENT PROTOCOL
PATIENT CHARACTERISTICS
ADHERENCE
DURATION OF TREATMENT AND FOLLOW-UP
CONCLUSIONS
AUTHOR INFORMATION
 CiteULike  Connotea  Delicious  Digg  Facebook  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter
What's this?
RELATED ARTICLE
Variations Between Clinical Trial Participants and Medicare Beneficiaries in Evidence Used for Medicare National Coverage Decisions
Sanket S. Dhruva and Rita F. Redberg
Arch Intern Med. 2008;168(2):136-140.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
How generalisable to community samples are clinical trial results for treatment of nicotine dependence: a comparison of common eligibility criteria with respondents of a large representative general population survey
Le Strat et al.
Tobacco Control 2011;20:338-343.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Do Postmarketing Surveillance Studies Represent Real-World Populations?: A Comparison of Patient Characteristics and Outcomes After Carotid Artery Stenting
Yeh et al.
Circulation 2011;123:1384-1390.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
On the problems of mixing RCTs with qualitative research: the case of the MRC framework for the evaluation of complex healthcare interventions
Blackwood et al.
Journal of Research in Nursing 2010;15:511-521.
ABSTRACT
Total mortality risk in relation to use of less-common dietary supplements
Pocobelli et al.
Am J Clin Nutr 2010;91:1791-1800.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials
Moher et al.
BMJ 2010;340:c869-c869.
FULL TEXT
How to assess the external validity of therapeutic trials: a conceptual approach
Dekkers et al.
Int J Epidemiol 2010;39:89-94.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
How to increase the value of randomised trials in COPD research
Puhan and Schunemann
Eur Respir J 2009;34:552-558.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Initial Antibiotic Selection and Patient Outcomes: Observations from the National Pneumonia Project
Bratzler et al.
Clinical Infectious Diseases 2008;47:S193-S201.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Should we use large scale healthcare interventions without clear evidence that benefits outweigh costs and harms? No
Landefeld et al.
BMJ 2008;336:1277-1277.
FULL TEXT
|
