The evidence-based medicine paradigm: Where are we 20 years later? Part 1

Canadian Journal of Neurological Sciences

Volumn 40, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 465-474

  Seshia, Shashi S ^a   Young, G Bryan ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SASKATCHEWAN   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN ONTARIO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; NULL HYPOTHESIS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RELIABILITY; REVIEW; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; SAMPLE SIZE; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE;

EID: 84879364903     PISSN: 03171671     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0317167100014542     Document Type: Review

References (144)

1. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA. 1992;268: 2420-5.
2. Straus SE, Glasziou P, Richardson WS, Haynes RB. Evidencebased Medicine; 4th ed. Toronto: Churchill Livingstone Elsevier, 2011
3. Goldenberg MJ, Borgerson K, Bluhm R. The nature of evidence in evidence-based medicine: Guest editors' introduction. Perspect Biol Med. 2009;52: 164-7.
4. Djulbegovic B, Guyatt GH, Ashcroft RE. Epistemologic inquiries in evidence-based medicine. Cancer Control. 2009;16: 158-68
5. Montori vM, Guyatt GH. Progress in evidence-based medicine. JAMA. 2008;300: 1814-6.
6. Burneo JG, Demaerschalk BM, Jenkins ME, editors. Neurology: An evidence-based approach. New York: Springer; 2012
7. Wiebe S, Demaerschalk B. Evidence based care in the neurosciences. Can J Neurol Sci. 2002;29: 115-9.
8. Gronseth G, French J. Practice parameters and technology assessments: What they are, what they are not, and why you should care. Neurology. 2008;71: 1639-43
9. Cochrane Collaboration. [Cited 2012 Aug 27]. Available from: Http: //www.cochrane.org/cochrane-reviews/
10. Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, University of Oxford. Oxford, UK. [Cited 2012 Dec 12]. Available from: Http: // www.cebm.net/
11. CONSORT group. [Cited 2012 Dec 11]. Avaiable from: Http: // www.consort-statement.org/
12. Davidoff F, Haynes B, Sackett D, Smith R. Evidence based medicine. BMJ. 1995;310: 1085-6.
13. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996;312: 71-2.
14. Straus SE, McAlister FA. Evidence-based medicine: A commentary on common criticisms. CMAJ. 2000;163: 837-41
15. Elamin MB, Montori vM. The hierarchy of evidence: From unsystematic clinical observations to systematic reviews. Chapter 2. In: Burneo JG, Demaerschalk BM, Jenkins ME, editors. Neurology: An evidence-based approach. New York: Springer; 2012: P.11-24
16. Anonymous. The periodic health examination: 2. 1985 update. Canadian Task Force on the Periodic Examination. CMAJ. 1986;134: 724-7.
17. French J, Gronseth G. Lost in a jungle of evidence: We need a compass. Neurology. 2008;71: 1634-8.
18. Lee SK, Singhal N, Aziz K, Cronin CM. The EPIq evidence reviews - practical tools for an integrated approach to knowledge translation. Paediatr Child Health. 2011;16: 629-30
19. Atkins D, Eccles M, Flottorp S, et al. Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations I: Critical appraisal of existing approaches The GRADE Working Group. BMC Health Serv Res. 2004;4: 38
20. Feinstein AR, Horwitz RI. Problems in the "evidence" of "evidence-based medicine". Am J Med. 1997;103: 529-35
21. Bluhm R, Borgerson K. Evidence-based Medicine. In: Gifford F, editor. Handbook of the Philosophy of Science. volume 16: Philosophy of Medicine. Amsterdam: Elsevier, Bv; 2011: P. 203-38
22. Cohen AM, Stavri PZ, Hersh WR. A categorization and analysis of the criticisms of Evidence-Based Medicine. Int J Med Inform. 2004;73: 35-43 (Pubitemid 38229186)
23. Rawlins M. De testimonio: On the evidence for decisions about the use of therapeutic interventions. Lancet. 2008;372: 2152-61
24. Rosner AL. Evidence-based medicine: Revisiting the pyramid of priorities. J Bodyw Mov Ther. 2012;16: 42-9.
25. Tonelli MR. The limits of evidence-based medicine. Respir Care. 2001;46: 1435,40; discussion 1440-1.
26. Upshur RE. Are all evidence-based practices alike? Problems in the ranking of evidence. CMAJ. 2003;169: 672-3. (Pubitemid 37266976)
27. Upshur R, Tracy CS. Evidence-based medicine: Perils and pitfalls. N Z Fam Physician. 2003;30(5).: 327-30
28. Concato J. Observational versus experimental studies: What's the evidence for a hierarchy? NeuroRx. 2004;1: 341-7. (Pubitemid 46621060)
29. Goodin DS, Reder AT. Evidence-based medicine: Promise and pitfalls. Mult Scler. 2012;18: 947-8.
30. Jadad AR, Enkin MW. Randomized controlled trials. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing BMJI Books; 2007
31. Rawlins MD. De Testimonio: On the evidence for decisions about the use of therapeutic interventions. London, UK: Royal College of Physicians; 2008
32. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328: 1490
33. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, vist GE, et al. GRADE: An emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336: 924-6. (Pubitemid 351632017)
34. Hill AB. Reflections on controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis. 1966;25: 107-13
35. Schwartz D, Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J Chronic Dis. 1967;20: 637-48
36. Cochrane AL. Archie Cochrane in his own words. Selections arranged from his 1972 introduction to "Effectiveness and Efficiency: Random Reflections on the Health Services" 1972. Control Clin Trials. 1989;10: 428-33
37. Horwitz RI. The dark side of evidence-based medicine. Cleve Clin J Med. 1996;63: 320-3.
38. Hartling L, McAlister FA, Rowe BH, Ezekowitz J, Friesen C, Klassen TP. Challenges in systematic reviews of therapeutic devices and procedures. Ann Intern Med. 2005;142: 1100-11 (Pubitemid 40847713)
39. Patsopoulos NA. A pragmatic view on pragmatic trials. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2011;13: 217-24
40. Buchanan WW, Kean WF. Evidence based medicine: The median is not the message. J Rheumatol. 2001;28: 2371-2. (Pubitemid 33031961)
41. Brigo F. New anti-epileptic drugs: Overcoming the limits of randomised controlled trials. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2011;9: 440-3.
42. Glasziou P, Chalmers I, Rawlins M, McCulloch P. When are randomised trials unnecessary? Picking signal from noise. BMJ. 2007;334: 349-51 (Pubitemid 46328045)
43. Wikipedia. The randomized controlled trial. [Cited 2012 Dec 12].Available at: Http: //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized-controlled-trial
44. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group. CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152: 726-32
45. Makhinson M. Biases in the evaluation of psychiatric clinical evidence. J Nerv Ment Dis. 2012;200: 76-82
46. 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. (Pubitemid 44485433)
47. Weiss NS, Koepsell TD, Psaty BM. Generalizability of the results of randomized trials. Arch Intern Med. 2008;168: 133-5. (Pubitemid 351185878)
48. Senn S, Julious S. Measurement in clinical trials: A neglected issue for statisticians? Stat Med. 2009;28: 3189-209
49. Gifford F. Uncertainty about clinical equipoise. Clinical equipoise and the uncertainty principles both require further scrutiny. BMJ. 2001;322: 795
50. Oricha BS, Yauri MB. Uncertainty principle versus clincal equipoise in clinical trials in Sub-Saharan Africa: Are they really tenable? Ann African Med. 2003;2(2).: 99-100
51. Weijer C, Shapiro SH, Cranley Glass K. For and against: Clinical equipoise and not the uncertainty principle is the moral underpinning of the randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2000;321: 756-8.
52. Djulbegovic B, Lacevic M, Cantor A, et al. The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research. Lancet. 2000;356: 635-8. (Pubitemid 30627590)
53. Rich W, Finer NN, Gantz MG, et al. Enrollment of extremely low birth weight infants in a clinical research study may not be representative. Pediatrics. 2012;129: 480-4.
54. Biau DJ, Kerneis S, Porcher R. Statistics in brief: The importance of sample size in the planning and interpretation of medical research. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466: 2282-8.
55. Heinzl H, Benner A, Ittrich C, Mittlbock M. Proposals for sample size calculation programs. Methods Inf Med. 2007;46: 655-61 (Pubitemid 350305422)
56. van der Tweel I, Askie L, vandermeer B, et al. Standard 4: Determining adequate sample sizes. Pediatrics. 2012;129 SUPPL3: S138-45
57. Sakpal Tv. Sample size estimation in clinical trial. Perspect Clin Res. 2010;1: 67-9.
58. Julious SA, Campbell MJ. Tutorial in biostatistics: Sample sizes for parallel group clinical trials with binary data. Stat Med. 2012;31: 2904-36
59. Charles P, Giraudeau B, Dechartres A, Baron G, Ravaud P. Reporting of sample size calculation in randomised controlled trials: Review. BMJ. 2009;338: B1732
60. Bacchetti P. Current sample size conventions: Flaws, harms, and alternatives. BMC Med. 2010;8: 17
61. Bacchetti P, Deeks SG, McCune JM. Breaking free of sample size dogma to perform innovative translational research. Sci Transl Med. 2011;3: 87ps24
62. Hill AB. Medical ethics and controlled trials. BMJ. 1963;1: 1043-9.
63. Hollis S, Campbell F. What is meant by intention to treat analysis? Survey of published randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 1999; 319: 670-4. (Pubitemid 29423954)
64. Gravel J, Opatrny L, Shapiro S. The intention-to-treat approach in randomized controlled trials: Are authors saying what they do and doing what they say? Clin Trials. 2007;4: 350-6. (Pubitemid 47572267)
65. Abraha I, Montedori A. Modified intention to treat reporting in randomised controlled trials: Systematic review. BMJ. 2010;340: C2697
66. Kruse RL, Alper BS, Reust C, Stevermer JJ, Shannon S, Williams RH. Intention-to-treat analysis: Who is in? Who is out? J Fam Pract. 2002;51: 969-71
67. McAlister FA. The "number needed to treat" turns 20-and continues to be used and misused. CMAJ. 2008;179: 549-53
68. Smeeth L, Haines A, Ebrahim S. Numbers needed to treat derived from meta-analyses-sometimes informative, usually misleading. BMJ. 1999;318: 1548-51 (Pubitemid 29255803)
69. Hutton JL. Number needed to treat and number needed to harm are not the best way to report and assess the results of randomised clinical trials. Br J Haematol. 2009;146: 27-30
70. Julious SA. Issues with number needed to treat. Stat Med. 2005;24: 3233-5. (Pubitemid 41489433)
71. Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper. Statistics for the nonstatistician. II: "Significant" relations and their pitfalls. BMJ. 1997;315: 422-5. (Pubitemid 27346047)
72. Goodman S. A dirty dozen: Twelve p-value misconceptions. Semin Hematol. 2008;45: 135-40 (Pubitemid 351876117)
73. Bhandari M, Montori vM, Schemitsch EH. The undue influence of significant p-values on the perceived importance of study results. Acta Orthop. 2005;76: 291-5. (Pubitemid 41039341)
74. Guyatt G, Jaeschke R, Heddle N, Cook D, Shannon H, Walter S. Basic statistics for clinicians: 2. Interpreting study results: Confidence intervals. CMAJ. 1995;152: 169-73
75. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, et al. GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence-imprecision. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64: 1283-93
76. Glasziou P, Doll H. Was the study big enough? Two cafe rules. Evid Based Med. 2006;11: 69-70 (Pubitemid 43905236)
77. Yudkin JS, Lipska KJ, Montori vM. The idolatry of the surrogate. BMJ. 2011;343: D7995
78. Aronson JK. Surrogate end points: Studying their benefits, taxonomy, and semantics. BMJ. 2012;344: E750
79. Colatsky TJ. Reassessing the validity of surrogate markers of drug efficacy in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Curr Opin Investig Drugs. 2009;10: 239-44
80. Psaty BM, Weiss NS, Furberg CD, et al. Surrogate end points, health outcomes, and the drug-approval process for the treatment of risk factors for cardiovascular disease. JAMA. 1999;282: 786-90 (Pubitemid 29404389)
81. Fleming TR, DeMets DL. Surrogate end points in clinical trials: Are we being misled? Ann Intern Med. 1996;125: 605-13 (Pubitemid 126450094)
82. Montori vM, Shah ND. What have we learnt from the rosiglitazone saga? BMJ. 2011;342: D1354
83. Cordoba G, Schwartz L, Woloshin S, Bae H, Gotzsche PC. Definition, reporting, and interpretation of composite outcomes in clinical trials: Systematic review. BMJ. 2010;341: C3920
84. Ferreira-Gonzalez I, Busse JW, Heels-Ansdell D, et al. Problems with use of composite end points in cardiovascular trials: Systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2007; 334: 786
85. Ferreira-Gonzalez I, Permanyer-Miralda G, Busse JW, et al. Methodologic discussions for using and interpreting composite endpoints are limited, but still identify major concerns. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60: 651,7; discussion 658-62
86. Ferreira-Gonzalez I, Permanyer-Miralda G, Busse JW, et al. Composite outcomes can distort the nature and magnitude of treatment benefits in clinical trials. Ann Intern Med. 2009;150: 566-7.
87. Montori vM, Busse JW, Permanyer-Miralda G, Ferreira I, Guyatt GH. How should clinicians interpret results reflecting the effect of an intervention on composite endpoints: Should I dump this lump? ACP J Club. 2005;143: A8.
88. Montori vM, Permanyer-Miralda G, Ferreira-Gonzalez I, et al. validity of composite end points in clinical trials. BMJ. 2005; 330: 594-6. (Pubitemid 40380357)
89. Sun X, Briel M, Busse JW, et al. Credibility of claims of subgroup effects in randomised controlled trials: Systematic review. BMJ. 2012;344: E1553
90. Wang R, Lagakos SW, Ware JH, Hunter DJ, Drazen JM. Statistics in medicine-reporting of subgroup analyses in clinical trials. N Engl J Med. 2007;357: 2189-94
91. Sacks FM, Pfeffer MA, Moye LA, et al. The effect of pravastatin on coronary events after myocardial infarction in patients with average cholesterol levels. Cholesterol and Recurrent Events Trial investigators. N Engl J Med. 1996;335: 1001-9. (Pubitemid 26338729)
92. Guyatt GH, Briel M, Glasziou P, Bassler D, Montori vM. Problems of stopping trials early. BMJ. 2012;344: E3863
93. Bassler D, Ferreira-Gonzalez I, Briel M, et al. Systematic reviewers neglect bias that results from trials stopped early for benefit. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60: 869-73 (Pubitemid 47198445)
94. Bassler D, Montori vM, Briel M, et al. Reflections on metaanalyses involving trials stopped early for benefit: Is there a problem and if so, what is it? Stat Methods Med Res. 2013;22: 159-68
95. Cady RK, Lipton RB, Hall C, Stewart WF, O'quinn S, Gutterman D. Treatment of mild headache in disabled migraine sufferers: Results of the Spectrum Study. Headache. 2000;40: 792-7. (Pubitemid 32053239)
96. Tellez-Zenteno JF, Wiebe S. Hippocampal stimulation in the treatment of epilepsy. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2011;22: 465,75, vi
97. Andrasik F, Powers SW, McGrath PJ. Methodological considerations in research with special populations: Children and adolescents. Headache. 2005;45: 520-5. (Pubitemid 40847175)
98. Lewis DW, Winner P, Wasiewski W. The placebo responder rate in children and adolescents. Headache. 2005;45: 232-9. (Pubitemid 40393213)
99. Klassen TP, Hartling L, Craig JC, Offringa M. Children are not just small adults: The urgent need for high-quality trial evidence in children. PLoS Med. 2008;5: E172
100. .Klassen TP, Hartling L, Hamm M, van der Lee JH, Ursum J, Offringa M. StaR Child Health: An initiative for RCTs in children. Lancet. 2009;374: 1310-2.
101. .Hartling L, Wittmeier KD, Caldwell PH, et al. StaR Child Health: Developing evidence-based guidance for the design, conduct, and reporting of pediatric trials. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011;90: 727-31
102. .Croskerry P. Perspectives on diagnostic failure and patient safety. Healthc q. 2012;15 Suppl: 50-6.
103. .Croskerry P. A universal model of diagnostic reasoning. Acad Med. 2009;84: 1022-8.
104. .Croskerry P. Context is everything or how could I have been that stupid? Healthc q. 2009;12 Spec No Patient: E171-6.
105. .Croskerry P, Abbass AA, Wu AW. How doctors feel: Affective issues in patients' safety. Lancet. 2008;372: 1205-6.
106. .Heneghan C, Glasziou P, Thompson M, et al. Diagnostic strategies used in primary care. BMJ. 2009;338: B946
107. .Cruz MF, Edwards J, Dinh MM, Barnes EH. The effect of clinical history on accuracy of electrocardiograph interpretation among doctors working in emergency departments. Med J Aust. 2012; 197: 161-5.
108. .Katelaris A. What influences clinical decision making? Med J Aust. 2012;197: 129
109. .Perera R, Heneghan C, Badenoch D. Statistics toolkit. Oxford, UK: Blackwell publishing; 2008
110. Feinstein AR. Misguided efforts and future challenges for research on "diagnostic tests". J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002;56: 330-2. (Pubitemid 34454551)
111. Stegenga J. Is meta-analysis the platinum standard of evidence? Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci. 2011;42: 497-507
112. Coyne JC, Thombs BD, Hagedoorn M. Ain't necessarily so: Review and critique of recent meta-analyses of behavioral medicine interventions in health psychology. Health Psychol. 2010;29: 107-16
113. Clark DA. The end of evidence-based medicine? Inflammopharmacology. 2012;20: 187-93
114. Rutjes AW, Reitsma JB, Di Nisio M, Smidt N, van Rijn JC, Bossuyt PM. Evidence of bias and variation in diagnostic accuracy studies. CMAJ. 2006;174: 469-76
115. Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, et al. Technical review number 16: Updating systematic reviews. AHRq Publication No. 07-0087. Rockville (MD).: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2007
116. Hartling L, Bond K, Santaguida PL, viswanathan M, Dryden DM. Testing a tool for the classification of study designs in systematic reviews of interventions and exposures showed moderate reliability and low accuracy. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64: 861-71
117. Mutasingwa DR, Ge H, Upshur RE. How applicable are clinical practice guidelines to elderly patients with comorbidities? Can Fam Physician. 2011;57: E253-62
118. Lugtenberg M, Burgers JS, Clancy C, Westert GP, Schneider EC. Current guidelines have limited applicability to patients with comorbid conditions: A systematic analysis of evidence-based guidelines. PLoS One. 2011;6: E25987
119. Ballantyne AJ, Rogers WA. Sex bias in studies selected for clinical guidelines. J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2011;20: 1297-306
120. .Fahy K, Tracy SK. Critique of Cochrane systematic review of home-like setting for birth. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2007; 5: 360-4.
121. .Cundiff DK. A systematic review of Cochrane anticoagulation reviews. Medscape J Med. 2009;11: 5.
122. .Bow S, Klassen J, Chisholm A, et al. A descriptive analysis of childrelevant systematic reviews in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. BMC Pediatr. 2010;10: 34
123. .Roseman M, Milette K, Bero LA, et al. Reporting of conflicts of interest in meta-analyses of trials of pharmacological treatments. JAMA. 2011;305: 1008-17
124. .Roseman M, Turner EH, Lexchin J, Coyne JC, Bero LA, Thombs BD. Reporting of conflicts of interest from drug trials in Cochrane reviews: Cross sectional study. BMJ. 2012;345: E5155
125. .Hartling L, Hamm M, Milne A, et al. validity and inter-rater reliability testing of quality assessment instruments. Rockville (MD).: Agency for health care research and policy, US department of health and human services; 2012
126. .Tharyan P. Evidence-based medicine: Can the evidence be trusted? Indian J Med Ethics. 2011;8: 201-7.
127. .Tharyan P. Criminals in the citadel and deceit all along the watchtower: Irresponsibility, fraud, and complicity in the search for scientific truth. Mens Sana Monogr. 2012;10: 158-80
128. .Bonita RE, Adams S, Whellan DJ. Reporting of clinical trials: Publication, authorship, and trial registration. Heart Fail Clin. 2011;7: 561-7.
129. .Mowatt G, Shirran L, Grimshaw JM, et al. Prevalence of honorary and ghost authorship in Cochrane reviews. JAMA. 2002;287: 2769-71 (Pubitemid 34591959)
130. .Wislar JS, Flanagin A, Fontanarosa PB, Deangelis CD. Honorary and ghost authorship in high impact biomedical journals: A cross sectional survey. BMJ. 2011;343: D6128
131. .Avraham R. Clinical practice guidelines: The warped incentives in the U.S. healthcare system. Am J Law Med. 2011;37: 7-40
132. .Guyatt G, Akl EA, Hirsh J, et al. The vexing problem of guidelines and conflict of interest: A potential solution. Ann Intern Med. 2010;152: 738-41
133. .Neuman J, Korenstein D, Ross JS, Keyhani S. Prevalence of financial conflicts of interest among panel members producing clinical practice guidelines in Canada and United States: Cross sectional study. BMJ. 2011;343: D5621
134. .Scott IA, Guyatt GH. Clinical practice guidelines: The need for greater transparency in formulating recommendations. Med J Aust. 2011;195: 29-33
135. .Norris SL, Holmer HK, Burda BU, Ogden LA, Fu R. Conflict of interest policies for organizations producing a large number of clinical practice guidelines. PLoS One. 2012;7: E37413
136. .Bailey CS, Fehlings MG, Rampersaud YR, Hall H, Wai EK, Fisher CG. Industry and evidence-based medicine: Believable or conflicted? A systematic review of the surgical literature. Can J Surg. 2011;54: 321-6.
137. .Lundh A, Barbateskovic M, Hrobjartsson A, Gotzsche PC. Conflicts of interest at medical journals: The influence of industry-supported randomised trials on journal impact factors and revenue - cohort study. PLoS Med. 2010;7: E1000354
138. .Upshur R, Buetow S, Loughlin M, Miles A. Can academic and clinical journals be in financial conflict of interest situations? The case of evidence-based incorporated. J Eval Clin Pract. 2006;12: 405-9. (Pubitemid 44126788)
139. .Doshi P, Jefferson T, Del Mar C. The imperative to share clinical study reports: Recommendations from the Tamiflu experience. PLoS Med. 2012;9: E1001201
140. .Moynihan R. Rosiglitazone, marketing, and medical science. BMJ. 2010;340: C1848
141. .Wang AT, McCoy CP, Murad MH, Montori vM. Association between industry affiliation and position on cardiovascular risk with rosiglitazone: Cross sectional systematic review. BMJ. 2010;340: C1344
142. .Zarin DA, Tse T. Medicine. Moving toward transparency of clinical trials. Science. 2008;319: 1340-2. (Pubitemid 351354858)
143. .Rhode DL, Packel AK. Ethics and Non Profits. [updated summer 2009; cited 2012 Aug 5] Available at: Http: //www.ssireview.org/ articles/entry/ethics-and- nonprofits
144. .Booth A. Evidence-based practice: Triumph of style over substance? Health Info Libr J. 2011;28: 237-41