Can there be a more patient-centred approach to determining clinically important effect sizes for randomized treatment trials?

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 47, Issue 7, 1994, Pages 787-795

  Naylor, C David ^a,b   Llewellyn Thomas, Hilary A ^b  

^a SUNNYBROOK RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

Patient preferences; Probability trade offs; Randomized control trial; Treatment effects

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; HUMAN; INFORMED CONSENT; METHODOLOGY; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROBABILITY; SAMPLE;

HUMAN; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PATIENT SELECTION; PROBABILITY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; SAMPLE SIZE; SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0028000754     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(94)90176-7     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized control trial
2. When was a “negative” clinical trial big enough? How many patients you needed depends on what you found
3. Indexes and boundaries for “quantitative significance” in statistical decisions
4. Why do we need some large, simple randomized trials?
5. Using economic analysis to determine the resource consequences of choices made in planning clinical trials
6. Establishing therapeutic equivalency. What is a clinically significant difference?
7. Patients versus surrogates: whose opinion counts on ethics review panels?
8. Patients' willingness to enter clinical trials: measuring the association with perceived benefit and preference for decision participation
9. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice
10. GISSI-2: a factorial randomised trial of alteplase versus streptokinase and heparin versus no heparin among 12,490 patients with acute myocardial infarction. Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Infarto Miocardico.
11. In-hospital mortality and clinical course of 20,891 patients with suspected acute myocardial infarction randomised between alteplase and streptokinase with or without heparin
12. ISIS-3: a randomised comparison of streptokinase vs tissue plasminogen activator vs anistreplase and of aspirin plus heparin vs aspirin alone among 41,299 cases of suspected acute myocardial infarction
13. The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public
14. A scale of valuations of states of illness: Is there a social consensus?
15. Whose utilitites for decision analysis?
16. Cancer Patients' Evaluations of Their Current Health State: The influences of Expectations, Comparisons, Actual Health Status, and Mood
17. Studying patients' preferences in health care decision-making
18. Eliciting preferences for alternative drug therapies in oncology: Influence of treatment outcome descrip tion, elicitation technique, and treatment experience on preference
19. Attitudes to chemotherapy: comparing views of patients with cancer and those of doctors, nurses, and general public
20. Patient assessment of adjuvant treatment in operable breast cancer
21. Risk language preferred by mothers in considering a hypothetical new vaccine for their children
22. On the Elicitation of Preferences for Alternative Therapies
23. Eliciting preferences for alternative drug cancer treatments
24. Effects of framing and level of probability on patients' preferences for cancer chemotherapy
25. Cancer patients' decision making and trial entry preferences: the effects of “framing” information about short-term toxicity and long-term survival
26. Absolutely relative: how research results are summarized can affect treatment decisions
27. Measured enthusiasm: does the method of reporting trial results alter perceptions of therapeutic effectiveness?
28. Fallacy of the five-year survival in lung cancer
29. Prescribing propensity: influence of life-expectancy gains and drug costs.
30. Quality-adjusted life-years. Ethical implications for physicians and policymakers