Impact of participant and physician intervention preferences on randomized trials: A systematic review

JAMA

Volumn 293, Issue 9, 2005, Pages 1089-1099

  King, Michael ^a   Nazareth, Irwin ^a   Lampe, Fiona ^a   Bower, Peter ^b   Chandler, Martin ^a   Morou, Maria ^a   Sibbald, Bonnie ^b   Lai, Rosalind ^a  

^a ROYAL FREE AND UNIVERSITY COLLEGE MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; DECISION MAKING; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; VALIDATION PROCESS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PATIENT SELECTION; REPRODUCIBILITY;

HUMANS; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PATIENT SELECTION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 14144255408     PISSN: 00987484     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jama.293.9.1089     Document Type: Review

References (53)

1. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness. In: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination's Guidance for Those Carrying Out or Commissioning Reviews: Report 4. 2nd ed. York, England: University of York; 2001.
2. Cook T, Campbell D. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Chicago, Ill: Rand McNally; 1979.
3. Janevic M, Janz N, Dodge J, et al. The role of choice in health education intervention trials: a review and case study. Soc Sci Med. 2003;56:1581-1594.
4. Brewin CR, Bradley C. Patient preferences and randomised clinical trials. BMJ. 1989;299:313-315.
5. Wennberg JE, Barry MJ, Fowler FJ, Mulley A. Outcomes research, PORTS, and health care reform. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993;703:52-62.
6. Rücker G. A two stage trial design for testing treatment, self selection and treatment preference effects. Stat Med. 1989;8:477-485.
7. Ashok PW, Kidd A, Flett GM, Fitzmaurice A, Graham W, Templeton A. A randomised comparison of medical abortion and surgical vacuum aspiration at 10-13 weeks gestation. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:92-98.
8. Bain C, Cooper KG, Parkin ED. A partially randomised patient preference trial of microwave endometrial ablation using local anaesthesia and intravenous sedation or general anaesthesia: a pilot study. Gynaecol Endosc. 2001;10:223-228.
9. Bakker A, Spinhoven P, Balkom AJ, Vleugel L, van Dyck R. Cognitive therapy by allocation versus cognitive therapy by preference in the treatment of panic disorder Psychother Psychosom. 2000;69:240-243.
10. Bakker A, Van Dyck R, Spinhoven P, Van Balkom AJ. Paroxetine, clomipramine, and cognitive therapy in the treatment of panic disorder. J Clin Psychiatry. 1999;60:831-838.
11. Bedi N, Chilvers C, Churchill R, et al. Assessing effectiveness of treatment of depression in primary care: a partially randomised preference trial. Br J Psychiatry. 2000;177:312-318.
12. Chilvers C, Dewey M, Fielding K, et al. Antidepressant drugs and generic counselling for treatment of major depression in primary care: randomised trial with patient preference arms. BMJ. 2001;322:772-775.
13. Detre KM, Guo P, Holubkov R, et al. Coronary revascularisation in diabetic patients: a comparison of the randomised and observational components of the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularisation (BARI). Circulation. 1999;99:633-640.
14. Gossop M, Johns A, Green L. Opiate withdrawal: inpatient versus outpatient programmes and preferred versus random assignment to treatment. BMJ. 1986;293:103-104.
15. Helsing M, Bergman B, Thaning L, Hero U. Quality of life and survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer receiving supportive care plus chemotherapy with carboplatin and etoposide or supportive care only: a multicentre randomised phase III trial. Eur J Cancer. 1998;34:1036-1044.
16. Henshaw RC, Naji SA, Russell IT, Templeton AA. Comparison of medical abortion with surgical vacuum aspiration: women's preferences and acceptability of treatment. BMJ. 1993;307:714-717.
17. Henshaw RC, Naji SA, Russell IT, Templeton AA. A comparison of medical abortion (using miferpristone and gemeprost) with surgical vacuum aspiration: efficacy and early medical sequelae. Hum Reprod. 1994;9:2167-2172.
18. Howie FL, Henshaw RC, Naji SA, Russell IT, Templeton AA. Medical abortion or vacuum aspiration? two year follow up of a patient preference trial. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104:829-833.
19. Jensen LB, Vestergaard P, Hermann AP, et al. Hormone replacement therapy dissociates fat mass and bone mass and tends to reduce weight gain in early postmenopausal women: a randomized controlled 5 year clinical trial of the Danish Osteoporosis Prevention Study. J Bone Miner Res. 2003;18:333-342.
20. Kendrick D, Fielding K, Bentley E, Miller P, Kerslake R, Pringle M. The role of radiography in primary care patients with low back pain of at least 6 weeks duration: a randomised (unblinded) controlled trial. Health Technol Assess. 2001;5:1-69.
21. Kerry S, Dundas D, Hilton S, Rink E, Patel S, Lord J. Routine referral for radiography of patients presenting with low back pain: is patient's outcome influenced by GP's referral for plain radiography? Health Technol Assess. 2000;4.
22. King SB, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS, et al; Emory Angioplasty Versus Surgical Trial (EAST). A randomised trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:1044-1050.
23. King SB, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS, Kasinski AS, Barnhart HX, Kutner MH. Emory Angioplasty Versus Surgery trial (EAST): design, recruitment, and baseline description of patients. Am J Cardiol. 1995;70:42C-59C.
24. King SB, Barnhart HX, Kosinski HS, et al. Angioplasty or surgery for multivessel coronary artery disease: comparison of eligible registry and randomised patients in the EAST trial and influence of treatment selection on outcomes. Am J Cardiol. 1997;79:1453-1459.
25. King M, Sibbald B, Ward E, et al. Randomised controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy and usual general practitioner care in the management of depression as well as mixed anxiety and depression in primary care. Health Technol Assess. 2000;4:19.
26. Ward E, King M, Lloyd M, et al. Randomised controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitive-behaviour therapy and usual general practitioner care for patients with depression, I: clinical effectiveness. BMJ. 2000;321:1383-1388.
27. Bower P, Byford S, Sibbald B, et al. Randomized controlled trial of non-directive counselling, cognitive-behavioural therapy, and usual general practitioner care for patients with depression, II: cost-effectiveness. BMJ. 2000;321:1389-1392.
28. McKay JR, Alterman AI, McLellan T, Snider EC, O'Brien CP. Effect of random versus non random assignment in a comparison of inpatient and day hospital rehabilitation for male alcoholics. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1995;63:70-78.
29. McKay JR, Alterman AI, McLellan T, Boardman CR, Mulvaney FD, O'Brien CP. Random versus non-random assignment in the evaluation of treatment for cocaine abusers. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1998;66:697-701.
30. Melchart D, Steger HG, Linde K, et al. Integrating patient preferences in clinical trials: a pilot study of acupuncture vs. midazolam for gastroscopy. J Altern Complement Med. 2002;8:265-274.
31. Nicolaides K, Brizot ML, Patel F, Snijders R. Comparison of chorionic villus sampling and amniocentesis for fetal karyotyping at 10-13 weeks gestation Lancet. 1994;344:435-439.
32. Olschewski M, Schumacher M, Davis K. Analysis of randomised and nonrandomised patients in clinical trial using the comprehensive cohort follow up study design. Control Clin Trials. 1992;13:226-239.
33. CASS Principal Investigators. Coronary Artery Surgery Study (CASS): a randomized trial of coronary artery bypass surgery: comparability of entry characteristics and survival in randomized patients and non-randomized patients meeting randomisation criteria. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984;3:114-128.
34. Paradise JL, Bluestone CD, Bachman RZ, et al. Efficacy of tonsillectomy for recurrent throat infection in severely affected children. N Engl J Med. 1984;310:674-683.
35. Paradise JL, Bluestone CD, Rogers KD, et al. Efficacy of adenoidectomy for recurrent otitis media in children previously treated with tympanostomy-tube placement: results of parallel randomized and non-randomized trials. JAMA. 1990;263:2066-2073.
36. Reddihough DS, King J, Coleman G, Catanese T. Efficacy of programmes based on conductive education for young children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol. 1998;40:763-770.
37. Riedl S, Peter B, Geiss H, Aulmann M, Bach A, Lehnert T. Mikrobiologische und klinische Wirksamkeit der selektiven Darmdekontamination bei der trandthorakalen Resektion von Oesophagus-und Kardiacarcinomen. Chirurg. 2001;72:1160-1170.
38. Rovers MM, Straatman H, Ingels K, van der Wilt GJ, van den Broek P, Zielhuis GA. Generalisability of trial results based on randomised versus non-randomised allocation of OME infants to ventilation tubes or watchful waiting. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54:789-794.
39. Rovers MM. Otitis media with effusion in infants: the effects of ventilation tubes. Proefschrift. 2000;1:2.
40. Schumacher M, Bastert G, Bojar H, et al; German Breast Cancer Study Group. Randomised "X" trial evaluating hormonal treatment and the duration of chemotherapy in node positive breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12:2086-2093.
41. Schmoor C, Olschewski M, Schumacher M. Randomized and non-randomized patients in clinical trials: experience with comprehensive cohort studies. Stat Med. 1996;15:263-271.
42. de C Williams AC, Nicholas MK, Richardson PH, Pither CE, Fernandes J. Generalizing from a controlled trial: the effects of patient preference versus randomization on the outcome of inpatient versus outpatient chronic pain management. Pain. 1999;83:57-65.
43. Woodward J, Kelly SM. A pilot study for a randomised controlled trial of water birth versus land birth. BJOG. 2004;111:537-545.
44. Cooper KG, Grant AM, Garratt AM. The impact of using a partially randomised patient preference design when evaluating alternative managements for heavy menstrual bleeding. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104:1367-1373.
45. Cooper KG, Parkin DE, Garratt AM, Grant AM. A randomised comparison of medical and hysteroscopic management in women consulting a gynaecologist for treatment of heavy menstrual loss. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1997;104:1360-1366.
46. Kitchener HC, Burns S, Nelson L, et al. A randomised controlled trial of cytological surveillance versus patient choice between surveillance and colposcopy in managing mildly abnormal cervical smears. BJOG. 2004;111:63-70.
47. Noel PH, Larme AC, Meyer J, Marsh G, Correa A, Pugh JA. Patient choice in diabetes education curriculum. Diabetes Care. 1998;21:896.
48. Rokke PD, Tomhave JA, Jocic Z. The role of client choice and target selection in self-management therapy for depression in older adults. Psychol Aging. 1999;14:155-169.
49. Chinn S. A simple method for converting an odds ratio to an effect size for use in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 2000;19:3127-3131.
50. Cohen J. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
51. Benson K, Hartz A. A comparison of observational studies and randomised controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1878-1886.
52. Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz RI. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research design. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1887-1892.
53. Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. London, England: Sage; 1997.