Some main problems eroding the credibility and relevance of randomized trials

Bulletin of the NYU Hospital for Joint Diseases

Volumn 66, Issue 2, 2008, Pages 135-139

  Ioannidis, John P A ^a,b,c  

^a INSTITUTE OF COMPUTER SCIENCE   (Greece)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF IOANNINA   (Greece)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL RESEARCH; CONFERENCE PAPER; DATA ANALYSIS; INTERNAL VALIDITY; METHODOLOGY; PUBLICATION; QUALITY CONTROL; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; SAMPLE SIZE; SELECTION BIAS;

EID: 46049087363     PISSN: 19369719     EISSN: 19369727     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (49)

1. Ioannidis JPA, Lau J. Evolution of treatment effects over time: empirical evidence from recursive cumulative meta-analyses. Proc Natl Acad Sciences, USA. 2001;98:831-6.
2. Trikalinos TA, Churchill R, Ferri M, et al. Effect sizes in cumulative meta-analyses of mental health randomized trials evolved over time. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:1124-30.
3. Ioannidis JPA. Contradicted and initial stronger effects in highly-cited clinical research. JAMA. 2005;294:218-28.
4. Gluud LL. Bias in clinical intervention research. Am J Epidemiol. 2006;163:493-501.
5. Chan AW, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet. 2005;365:1159-62.
6. Ioannidis JP. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2005;2:e124.
7. Ioannidis JP. Why most published research findings are false: author's reply to Goodman and Greenland. PLoS Med. 2007;4: e215.
8. Jüni P, Altman DG, Egger M. Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ. 2001;323:42-6.
9. Jüni P, Witschi A, Bloch R, et al. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. JAMA. 1999;282:1054-60.
10. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias: dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA. 1995;273:408-12.
11. Balk EM, Bonis PAL, Moskowitz H, et al. Correlation of quality measures with estimates of treatment effect in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. JAMA. 2002;287:2973-82.
12. Greenland S. Invited commentary: a critical look at some popular meta-analytic methods. Am J Epidemiol. 1994;140:290-6.
13. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, et al: The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2001;134:663-94.
14. Soares HP, Daniels S, Kumar A, et al. Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. BMJ. 2004;328:22-4.
15. Montori VM, Bhandari M, Devereaux PJ, et al. In the dark: the reporting of blinding status in randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:787-90.
16. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Altman DG. The landscape and lexicon of blinding in randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2002;136:254-9.
17. Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publication bias in clinical research. Lancet. 1991;337:867-72.
18. Ioannidis JPA. Effect of the statistical significance of results on the time to completion and publication of randomized efficacy trials. JAMA. 1998;279:281-6.
19. Chan AW, Altman DG. Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomised trials on PubMed: review of publications and survey of authors. BMJ. 2005;330:753.
20. Welch HG, Mogielnicki J. Presumed benefit: lessons from the American experience with marrow transplantation for breast cancer. BMJ. 2002;324:1088-92.
21. Ioannidis JP, Trikalinos TA. An exploratory test for an excess of significant findings. Clin Trials. 2007;4:245-53.
22. Laine C, Horton R, DeAngelis CD, et al. Clinical trial registration: looking back and moving ahead. Lancet. 2007;369:1909-11.
23. Kavvoura FK, Liberopoulos G, Ioannidis JP. Selection in reported epidemiological risks: an empirical assessment. PLoS Med 2007;4:e79.
24. Reveiz L, Krleza-Jeric K, Chan AW, De Aguiar S. Do trialists endorse clinical trial registration? Survey of a PubMed sample. Trials 2007;8:30.
25. Ioannidis JP. Indirect comparisons: the mesh and mess of clinical trials. Lancet. 2006;368:1470-2.
26. Salanti G, Kavvoura FK, Ioannidis JPA. Exploring the geometry of treatment networks. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148:544-53.
27. Zwarenstein M, Oxman A. Pragmatic Trials in Health Care Systems (PRACTIHC). Why are so few randomized trials useful, and what can we do about it? J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:1125-6.
28. Bero L, Oostvogel F, Bacchetti P, et al. Factors associated with findings of published trials of drug-drug comparisons: why some statins appear more efficacious than others. PLoS Med. 2007;4:e184.
29. Chalmers TC, Lau J. Changes in clinical trials mandated by the advent of meta-analysis. Stat Med. 1996;15:1263-8.
30. Fleming TR, DeMets DL. Surrogate end points in clinical trials: are we being misled? Ann Intern Med. 1996;125:605-13.
31. Ioannidis JPA, Lau J. Completeness of safety reporting in randomized trials: an evaluation of 7 medical areas. JAMA. 2001;285:437-43.
32. Ioannidis JP, Mulrow CD, Goodman SN. Adverse events: the more you search, the more you find. Ann Intern Med. 2006;144:298-300.
33. Ioannidis JP, Evans SJ, Gøtzsche PC, et al. Better reporting of harms in randomized trials: an extension of the CONSORT Statement. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141:781-8.
34. Rothwell PM. External validity of randomised controlled trials: "to whom do the results of this trial apply?" Lancet. 2005;365:82-93.
35. Travers J, Marsh S, Williams M, et al. External validity of randomised controlled trials in asthma: to whom do the results of the trials apply? Thorax. 2007;62:219-23.
36. Goodman SN. Toward evidence-based medical statistics. 1: The p value fallacy. Ann Intern Med. 1999;130:995-1004.
37. Ioannidis JP. Limitations are not properly acknowledged in the scientific literature. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:324-9.
38. Als-Nielsen B, Chen W, Gluud C, Kjaergard LL. Association of funding and conclusions in randomized drug trials: a reflection of treatment effect or adverse events? JAMA. 2003;290:921-8.
39. Kjaergard LL, Gluud C. Citation bias of hepato-biliary randomized clinical trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2002;55:407-10.
40. Patsopoulos NA, Ioannidis JP, Analatos AA. Origin and funding of the most frequently cited papers in medicine: database analysis. BMJ. 2006;332:1061-4.
41. Sismondo S. Ghost management: how much of the medical literature is shaped behind the scenes by the pharmaceutical industry? PLoS Med. 2007;4:e286.
42. Donohue JM, Cevasco M, Rosenthal MB. A decade of direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:673-81.
43. Gagnon MA, Lexchin J. The cost of pushing pills: a new estimate of pharmaceutical promotion expenditures in the United States. PLoS Med. 2008;5:e1.
44. Giannakakis I, Ioannidis JPA. Arabian nights: 1001 tales of how pharmaceutical companies cater to the material needs of doctors. BMJ. 2000;321:1563-4.
45. Mann H, Djulbegovic B. Choosing a control intervention for a randomised clinical trial. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:7.
46. Yazici H. Use and abuse of the controlled clinical trial. Bull NYU Hosp Jt Dis. 2007;65:132-4.
47. Vickers A, Goyal N, Harland R, Rees R. Do certain countries produce only positive results? A systematic review of controlled trials. Control Clin Trials. 1998;19:159-66.
48. Shang A, Huwiler-Müntener K, Nartey L, et al. Are the clinical effects of homoeopathy placebo effects? Comparative study of placebo-controlled trials of homoeopathy and allopathy. Lancet 2005;366:726-32.
49. Djulbegovic B, Hozo I. When should potentially false research findings be considered acceptable? PLoS Med. 2007;4:e26.