Clinical research in anaesthesia; randomized controlled trials or observational studies?

European Journal of Anaesthesiology

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 1-5

  Feneck, R O ^a,b  

^a EACTA ^*  (United Kingdom)

^b McSPI Research Group   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANESTHESIA; CLINICAL MEDICINE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL RESEARCH; DRUG SAFETY; EDITORIAL; MEDICAL EDUCATION; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY;

ANESTHESIOLOGY; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; HUMANS; OBSERVATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS;

EID: 33845545475     PISSN: 02650215     EISSN: 13652346     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0265021506001967     Document Type: Editorial

References (37)

1. Jackson RG, Stamford JA, Strunin L. The canary is dead. Anaesthesia 2003; 58: 911-912.
2. Lee KP, Boyd EA, Holroyd-Leduc JM, Bacchetti P, Bero LA. Predictors of publication: characteristics of submitted manuscripts associated with acceptance at major biomedical journals. Med J Aust 2006; 184: 621-626.
3. Schulz KF, Grimes DA. Allocation concealment in randomised trials: defending against deciphering. Lancet 2002; 359: 614-618.
4. Fisher RA. The design of experiments, 8th edn, 1971. In: Bennet JH, ed. Statistical Methods, Experimental Design, and Scientific Inference. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995.
5. Chalmers I. Why transition from alternation to randomisation in clinical trials was made. BMJ 1999; 319: 1372.
6. Day SJ, Altman DG. Statistical notes; blinding in clinical trials and other studies. BMJ 2000; 321: 504.
7. House of Lords Science and Technology (6th Report) on Complementary and Alternative Medicine. November 2000. www.publications.parliament.uk
8. Tobin JR, Shafer SL, Davis PJ. Pediatric research and scholarship: another Gordian Knot? Anesth Analg 2006; 103: 43-48.
9. Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D'Amico R et al. International Stroke Trial Collaborative Group; European Carotid Surgery Trial Collaborative Group. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess 2003; 7: 1-173.
10. Kunz R, Oxman AD. The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials. BMJ 1998; 317: 1185-1190.
11. Julian DG. What is right and what is wrong about evidence-based medicine? J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol 2003; 14(9 Suppl): S2-S5.
12. Mangano DT, Tudor IC, Dietzel C. Multicentre Study of Perioperative Ischemia Research Group, Ischemia Research and Education Foundation. The risk associated with aprotinin in cardiac surgery. New Engl J Med 2006; 354: 353-365.
13. Kirk-Smith MD, Stretch DD. Evidence-based medicine and randomized double-blind clinical trials: a study of flawed implementation. J Eval Clin Pract 2001; 7: 119-123.
14. Clarke MJ, Stewart LA. Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials: the need for complete data. J Eval Clin Pract 1995; 1: 119-126.
15. The Report of the Public Inquiry into children's heart surgery at the Bristol Royal Infirmary 1984-1995; Learning from Bristol. July 2001. www.bristol-inquiry.org.uk/final_report
16. www.heartsurgery.healthcarecommision.org.uk
17. Blackstone EH. Comparing apples and oranges. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2002; 123: 8-15.
18. D'Agostino Jr RB. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med 1998; 17: 2265-2281.
19. Hunter D. First, gather the data. New Engl J Med 2006; 354: 329-331.
20. Rubin DB. Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scores. Ann Intern Med 1997; 127: 757-763.
21. Ott E, Nussmeier NA, Duke PC et al. Multicenter Study of Perioperative Ischemia (McSPI) Research Group; Ischemia Research and Education Foundation (IREF) Investigators. Efficacy and safety of the cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors parecoxib and valdecoxib in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass surgery. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2003; 125: 1481-1492.
22. Nussmeier NA, Whelton AA, Brown MT et al. Complications of the COX-2 inhibitors parecoxib and valdecoxib after cardiac surgery. New Engl J Med 2005; 352: 1081-1091.
23. Vandenbroucke JP. When are observational studies as credible as randomised trials? Lancet 2004; 363: 1728-1731.
24. Feneck R. OPCAB surgery: time for a reappraisal? J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth 2004; 18: 253-255.
25. Etminan M, Samii Etminan M, Samii A. Pharmacoepidemiology I: a review of pharmacoepidemiologic study designs. Pharmacotherapy 2004; 24: 964-969.
26. Royston D, Bidstrup BP, Taylor KM, Sapsford RN. Effect of aprotinin on need for blood transfusion after repeat open-heart surgery. Lancet 1987; 2: 1289-1291.
27. Karkouti K, Beattie WS, Dattilo KM et al. A propensity score case-control comparison of aprotinin and tranexamic acid in high-transfusion-risk cardiac surgery. Transfusion 2006; 46: 327-338.
28. Young C, Horton R. Putting clinical trials into context. Lancet 2005; 366: 107-108.
29. Fergusson D, Glass KC, Hutton B, Shapiro S. Randomized controlled trials of aprotinin in cardiac surgery: could clinical equipoise have stopped the bleeding? Clin Trials 2005; 2: 218-229.
30. Sedrakyan A, Treasure T, Elefteriades JA. Effect of aprotinin on clinical outcomes in coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2004; 128: 442-448.
31. Henry DA, Moxey AJ, Carless PA et al. Anti-fibrinolytic use for minimising perioperative allogeneic blood transfusion. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2001; 1: CD001886.
32. Sedrakyan A, Atkins D, Treasure T. The risk of aprotinin: a conflict of evidence. Lancet 2006; 367: 1376-1377.
33. www.scahq.org
34. www.eacta.org
35. www.acta.org.uk
36. Avorn J. Dangerous deception - hiding the evidence of adverse drug effects. New Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2169-2171.
37. Hiatt WR. Observational studies of drug safety - aprotinin and the absence of transparency. New Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2171-2173.