This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (13)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

CHARLES M. GRUBER, Jr., M.D., D.Sc.

AMA Arch Intern Med. 1956;98(6):767-773.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Both acceptance and interest in formal (planned) clinical research has grown rapidly in recent years. In consequence, the number of scientific publications has increased until it is practically impossible to keep abreast of medical literature in even a single field. The physician, therefore, reads selectively of necessity. Very often it is difficult to decide which articles to study and which ones to disregard. This presentation is intended to lend assistance in making such decisions.

From current medical journals, Ross¹ analyzed 100 consecutive articles, dealing with a procedure or a type of therapy, to determine the basis upon which conclusions had been drawn. In 45% of these articles the investigators made no attempt to compare the results of the specific therapy described to those in an untreated control group, and in another 18% the control used was considered inadequate. Through this study, Ross has demonstrated the lack of a scientific . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Indianapolis

Footnotes
Received for publication March 16, 1956.

Lilly Laboratory for Clinical Research Indianapolis General Hospital.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?