A general framework for the evaluation of clinical trial quality

Reviews on Recent Clinical Trials

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 79-88

  Berger, Vance W ^a   Alperson, Sunny Y ^b,c  

^a NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Additive; Evaluation systems; Randomization; Trial quality

Indexed keywords

AD HOC METHOD; ARTICLE; BINARY SCORING SYSTEM; CLINICAL STUDY; COCHRANE COLLABORATION; CONSOLIDATED STANDARDS OF REPORTING TRIALS; DELPHI CONSENSUS METHOD; EVALUATION RESEARCH; INTERNAL VALIDITY; JADAD SCORE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; RELIABILITY; SCORING SYSTEM; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; EVALUATION STUDIES AS TOPIC;

EID: 67651156127     PISSN: 15748871     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2174/157488709788186021     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Kassirer JP, Campion EW. Peer review: crude and understudied, but indispensable. J Am Med Assoc 1994; 272: 96-7.
2. Oxman AD, Guyatt GH. Guidelines for reading literature reviews. Can Med Assoc J 1988; 138: 697-703.
3. Berger VW. Is the Jadad score the proper evaluation of trials. J Rheumatol 2006; 33(8): 1710.
4. Gee E, Berger VW. On confusing prima-facie validity with true validity. Br J Dermatol 2007; 157(2): 425-6.
5. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17: 1-12.
6. Verhagen AP, de Vet HC, de Bie RA, et al. The Delphi list: A criteria list for quality assessment of randomized clinical trials for conducting systematic reviews developed by Delphi consensus. J Clin Epidemiol 1998; 51(2): 1234-51.
7. Altman DG, Schulz KF, Moher D, et al. The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 2001; 134(8): 663-94.
8. van Tulder MW, Furlan A, Bombardier C, Bouter L. Updated method guidelines for systematic reviews in the Cochrane collaboration back review group. Spine 2003; 28(12): 1290-99.
9. Amori RE, Lau J, Pittas AG. Efficacy and safety of incretin therapy in type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Am Med Assoc 2007; 298(2): 194-206.
10. Moher D, Cook DJ, Jadad AR, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized trials: implications for the conduct of metaanalyses. Health Technol Assess 1999; 3(12): i-iv, 1-98.
11. West S, King V, Carey TS, et al. Systems to rate the strength of scientific evidence. Evid Rep Technol Assess (Summ) 2002; (47):1-11.
12. Damen L, Bruijn JK, Verhagen AP, et al. Symptomatic treatment of migraine in children: a systematic review of medication trials. Pediatrics 2005; 116(2): e295-e302.
13. Mozaffarian D, Geelen A, Ingeborg A, et al. Effect of fish oil on heart rate in humans: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Circulation 2005; 112(13):1945-52.
14. Zabalegui A, Sanchez S, Sanchez PD, Juando C. Nursing and cancer support groups. J Adv Nurs 2005; 51(4): 369-81.
15. Bize R, Burnand B, Mueller Y, Cornuz J. Effectiveness of biomedical risk assessment as an aid for smoking cessation: a systematic review. Tob Control 2007; 16(3): 151-6.
16. Galaal K, Deane K, Sangal S, Lopes A. Interventions for reducing anxiety in women undergoing colposcopy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; (3): CD006013.
17. Piazzini DB, Aprile I, Ferrara PE, et al. A systematic review of conservative treatment of carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Rehabil 2007; 21(4): 299-314.
18. Collier A, Heilig L, Schilling L, Williams H, Dellavalle R. Cochrane Skin Group systematic reviews are more methodologically rigorous than other systematic reviews in dermatology. Br J Dermatol 2006; 155(6): 1230-5.
19. Gibbs S, Harvey I, Sterling J, Stark R. Local treatments for cutaneous warts: systematic review. BMJ 2002; 325:461.
20. Stender IM, Na R, Fogh H, Gluud C, Wulf HC. Photodynamic therapy with 5-aninolaevulinic acid or placebo for recalcitrant foot and hand warts: randomized double-blind trial. Lancet 2000; 355: 963-6.
21. Bookman AM, Williams KSA, Shainhouse JZ. Effect of a topical diclofenac solution for relieving symptoms of primary osteoarthritis of the knee: a randomized controlled trial. Can Med Assoc J 2004; 171: 333-8.
22. Towheed TE. Pennsaid therapy for osteoarthritis of the knee: a systematic review and metaanalysis of randomized controlled trials. J Rheumatol 2006: 33(8): 567-73.
23. Berger VW, Bears JD. When can a clinical trial be called 'randomized'? Vaccine 2003; 21: 468-72.
24. Bath FJ, Owen VE. Bath PMW. Quality of full and final publications reporting acute stroke trials. Stroke 1998; 29(10): 2203-10.
25. Friedman LM, Furberg CD, DeMets DL. Fundamentals of Clinical Trials, 3rd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag 1998.
26. Berger VW. Selection bias and covariate imbalances in randomized clinical trials. Chrichester: John Wiley & Sons 2005.
27. Shen J, Wenger N, Glaspy J, et al. Electroacupuncture for control of myeloablative chemotherapy-induced emesis: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2000; 284: 2755-61.
28. Lexchin, J. The secret things belong unto the Lord our God: Secrecy in the pharmaceutical arena. Med Law 2007; 26: 417-30.
29. 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.
30. Wong MC, Chung JW, Wong TK. Effects of treatments for symptoms of painful diabetic neuropathy: systematic review. BMJ 2007; 335: 87.
31. Berger, VW. Valid adjustment for binary covariates of randomized binary comparisons. Biom J 2004; 46(5): 589-594.
32. Berger VW. Improving the information content of categorical clinical trial endpoints. Control Clin Trials 2002; 23(5): 502-14.
33. Tracy CS, Dantas GC, Upshur RE. Evidence-based medicine in primary care: qualitative study of family physicians. BMC Fam Pract 2003; 4: 6.
34. French P. What is the evidence on evidence-based nursing? An epistemological concern. J Adv Nurs 2002; 37(3): 250-7.
35. Juni P, Witschi A, Egger, M. The hazards of scoring the quality of clinical trials for meta-analysis. J Am Med Assoc 1999, 282(11): 1054-60.
36. Feigenbaum S, Levy D. The technological obsolescence of scientific fraud. Rational Soc 1996; 8(3): 261-76.
37. Towheed, TE. Is the Jadad Score the proper evaluation of trials? J Rheumatol 2006; 33(8): 1711.