A pragmatic view on pragmatic trials

Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience

Volumn 13, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 217-224

  Patsopoulos, Nikolaos A ^a,b,c  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^c MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

Comparative; Evidencebased medicine; Pragmatic; Randomized controlled trial; Trial

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; MEDICAL LITERATURE; MEDICAL PRACTICE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); METHODOLOGY; REVIEW; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; RESEARCH DESIGN; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 80052146670     PISSN: 12948322     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Grimes DA, Schulz KF Bias and causal associations in observational research. Lancet. 2002;359:248-252.
2. Zwarenstein M, Oxman A Why are so few randomized trials useful, and what can we do about it? J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:1125-1126.
3. Weiss NS, Koepsell TD, Psaty BM Generalizabilityof the results of randomized trials. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168:133-135.
4. Treweek S, Zwarenstein M Making trials matter: pragmatic and explanatory trials and the problem of applicability. Trials. 2009;10:37.
5. Schwartz D, Lellouch J Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J Chronic Dis. 1967;20:637-648.
6. Tunis SR, Stryer DB, Clancy CM Practical clinical trials: increasing the value of clinical research for decision making in clinical and health policy. JAMA. 2003;290:1624-1632.
7. Maclure M Explaining pragmatic trials to pragmatic policymakers. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:476-478.
8. Gartlehner G, Hansen RA, Nissman D, et al. A simple and valid tool distinguished efficacy from effectiveness studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:1040-1048.
9. Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD, et al. A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:464-475.
10. Koppenaal T, Unmans J, Knottnerus JA, Spigt M Pragmatic vs. explanatory: an adaptation of the PRECIS tool helps to judge the applicability of systematic reviews for daily practice. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011. In press
11. Tosh G, Soares-Weiser K, Adams C Pragmatic vs. explanatory trials: the PRAGMASCOPE tool to help measuring differences in protocols of mental health randomized controlled trials. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2011;13:209-215.
12. Charlton BG Understanding randomized controlled trials: explanatory or pragmatic? Earn Pract. 1994;11:243-244.
13. Glasgow RE, Magid DJ, Beck A, et al. Practical clinical trials for translating research to practice: design and measurement recommendations. Med Care. 2005;43:551-557.
14. Macpherson H Pragmatic clinical trials. Complement Ther Med. 2004;12:136-140.
15. Prioritization. CoCR. Institute of Medicine Initial National Priorities for Compaiative Effectiveness Research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 2009
16. Rothwell PM External validity of randomised controlled trials: "to whom do the results of this trial apply?" Lancet. 2005;365:82-93.
17. Masuhr F, Busch M, Einhaupl KM Differences in medical and surgical therapy for stroke prevention between leading experts in North America and Western Europe. Stroke. 1998;29:339-345.
18. Wood L, Egger M, Gluud LL, et al. Empirical evidence of bias in treatment effect estimates in controlled trials with different interventions and outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ. 2008;336:601-605.
19. Odgaard-Jensen J, Vist GE, Timmer A, et al. Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;4:MR000012.
20. Pildal J, Hrobjartsson A, Jorgensen KJ, et al. Impact of allocation concealment on conclusions drawn from meta-analyses of randomized trials. Int J Epidemiol. 2007;36:847-857.
21. March J, Kraemer HC, Trivedi M, et al. What have we learned about trial design from NIMH-funded pragmatic trials? Neuropsychopharmacology. 2010;35:2491-2501.
22. Relton C, Torgerson D, O'Cathain A, Nicholl J Rethinking pragmatic randomised controlled trials: introducing the "cohort multiple randomised controlled trial" design. BMJ. 2010;340:c1066.
23. loannidis JPA Indirect comparisons: the mesh and mess of clinical trials. Lancet. 2006;368:1470-1472.
24. Lathyris DN, Patsopoulos NA, Salanti G, loannidis JP Industry sponsorship and selection of comparators in randomized clinical trials. Eur J Clin invest. 2010;40:172-182.
25. Goldberg NH, Schneeweiss S, Kowal MK, Gagne JJ Availability of comparative efficacy data at the time of drug approval in the United States. JAMA. 2011;305:1786-1789.
26. Group AOaCftACR. Major outcomes in high-risk hypertensive patients randomized to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or calcium channel blocker vs diuretic: The Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). JAMA. 2002;288:2981-2997.
27. Pocock SJ, Collier TJ, Dandreo KJ, et al. Issues in the reporting of epidemiological studies: a survey of recent practice. BMJ. 2004;329:883.
28. Lawlor DA, Davey Smith G, Kundu D, et al. Those confounded vitamins: what can we learn from the differences between observational versus randomised trial evidence? lancet. 2004;363:1724-1727.
29. Djulbegovic M, Djulbegovic B Implications of the principle of question propagation for comparative-effectiveness and "data mining" research. JAMA. 2011;305:298-299.
30. Karanicolas PJ, Montori VM, Schunemann H, Guyatt GH "Pragmatic" clinical trials: from whose perspective? Evid Based Med. 2009;14:130-131.
31. Patsopoulos NA, Analatos AA, loannidis JP Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. JAMA. 2005;293:2362-2366.
32. Lu G, Ades AE Combination of direct and indirect evidence in mixed treatment comparisons. Stat Med. 2004;23:3105-3124.
33. Cipriani A, Furukawa TA, Salanti G, et al. Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 12 new-generation antidepressants: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis. Lancet. 2009;373:746-758.
34. Zwarenstein M, Treweek S, Gagnier JJ, et al. Improving the reporting of pragmatic trials: an extension of the CONSORT statement. BMJ. 2008;337:a2390.