Systematic review to determine whether participation in a trial influences outcome

British Medical Journal

Volumn 330, Issue 7501, 2005, Pages 1175-1179

  Vist, Gunn Elisabeth ^a   Hagen, Kåre Birger ^b   Devereaux, P J ^c   Bryant, Dianne ^c   Kristoffersen, Doris Tove ^a   Oxman, Andrew David ^a  

^a Norwegian Health Services Research Centre   (Norway)

^b DIAKONHJEMMET HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^c MCMASTER UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTRE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATABASE; CELL HETEROGENEITY; CLINICAL RESEARCH; CLINICAL TRIAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; EVALUATION; HUMAN; META ANALYSIS; OUTCOMES RESEARCH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REVIEW; SAMPLING; STANDARDIZATION; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

BIOMEDICAL AND BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; EMPIRICAL APPROACH;

HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS; RISK FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 19744364557     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.38447.490463.8F     Document Type: Review

References (12)

1. Stiller CA. Centralized treatment, entry to trials and survival. Br J Cancer 1994;70:352-62.
2. Braunholtz DA, Edwards SJL, Lilford RJ. Are randomized clinical trials good for us (in the short term)? Evidence for a "trial effect." J Clin Epidemiol 2001;54:217-24.
3. Emergency Care Research Institute 2002. Patients' reasons for participation in clinical trials and effect of trial participation on patient outcomes. www.ecri.org/Patient_Information/Patient_Reference_Guide/evidence. pdf (accessed Nov 2004).
4. Peppercorn JM, Weeks JC, Cook EFC, Joffe S. Comparison of outcomes in cancer patients treated within and outside clinical trials: conceptual framework and structured review. Lancet 2004;363:263-70.
5. Rothwell PM. External validity of randomised controlled trials: "To whom do the results of this trial apply?" Lancet 2005;365:82-93.
6. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med 2002;21:1539-58.
7. Mahon J, Laupacis A, Donner A, Wood T. Randomised study of n of 1 trials versus standard practice. BMJ 1996;312:1069-74.
8. Mahon JL, Laupacis A, Hodder RV, McKim DA, Paterson NAM, Wood TE, et al. Theophylline for irreversible chronic airflow limitation. A randomized study comparing n of 1 trials to standard practice. Chest 1999;115:38-48.
9. Dahan R, Caulin C, Figea L, Kanis JA, Caulin F, Segrestaa JM. Does informed consent influence therapeutic outcome? A clinical trial of the hypnotic activity of placebo in patients admitted to hospital. BMJ 1986;293:363-4.
10. 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;104:1367-73.
11. Bergmann JF, Chassany O, Gandiol J, Deblois P, Kanis JA, Segrestaa JM, et al. A randomised clinical trial of the effect of informed consent on the analgesic activity of placebo and naproxen in cancer pain. Clin Trials Metaanal 1994;29:41-7.
12. Kunz R, Vist G, Oxman AD. Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials (Cochrane methodology review). In: Cochrane Library. Issue 4. Oxford: Update Software, 2002.