Standard requirements for randomized controlled trials in surgery

Surgery

Volumn 144, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 838-839

  Zonta, Sandro ^a,b   De Martino, Michela ^a,b  

^a FONDAZIONE IRCCS POLICLINICO SAN MATTEO   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PAVIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL PRACTICE; CLINICAL STUDY; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; GOLD STANDARD; GOVERNMENT; LETTER; MEDICAL RESEARCH; METHODOLOGY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RISK; SAMPLE SIZE; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE;

HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, OPERATIVE;

EID: 54049114228     PISSN: 00396060     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2008.05.008     Document Type: Letter

References (7)

1. Fletcher S., and Sackett D. The periodic health examination. Canadian Task Force on The Periodic Task Force. CMAJ 121 (1979) 1193-1254
2. Begg C.B., Cho M., Eastwood S., Horton R., Moher D., Olkin I., et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials: the CONSORT statement. JAMA 276 (1996) 637-639
3. Moher D., Shultz K.F., and Altman D.G. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials. Lancet 357 (2001) 1191-1194
4. Consort Journal. The CONSORT Statement. Available from: http://www.consort-statement.org/Endorsements/Journals/journals.html
5. McCulloch P., Taylor I., Sasako M., Lovet B., and Griffin D. Randomised trials in surgery: problems and possible solutions. BMJ 321 (2002) 1448-1451
6. Schulz K.F., Chalmers L., Hayes R.J., and Altman D.J. Empirical evidence of bias: dimension of methodological quality associated with estimate of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA 273 (1995) 408-412
7. Moher D., Pham B., Jones A., Cook D.J., Jadad A.R., Moher R., et al. Does quality of reports of randomised report affect estimates of intervention efficacy reported in meta-analyses?. Lancet 352 (1998) 609-613