Comparative effectiveness research: A view from the other side of the pond

Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 293-295

  Rawlins, Michael D ^a,b  

^a NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR HEALTH AND CARE EXCELLENCE   (United Kingdom)

^b LONDON SCHOOL OF HYGIENE AND TROPICAL MEDICINE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COMORBIDITY; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; EVALUATION RESEARCH; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; NOTE; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLICATION; QUALITY OF LIFE; RESEARCH PRIORITY; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; MALE; PATIENT OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT-CENTERED CARE; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84886944771     PISSN: 20426305     EISSN: 20426313     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2217/cer.12.17     Document Type: Note

References (13)

1. Doll R, Peto R. Randomised controlled trials and retrospective controls. Br. Med. J. 280(6206), 44 (1980).
2. Glasziou P, Chalmers I, Rawlins M, McCulloch P. When are randomised controlled trials unnecessary- Picking signal from noise. BMJ 334(7589), 349-351 (2007).
3. Garside R, Round A, Dalziel K, Stein K, Royle P. The effectiveness and cost- effectiveness of imatinib in chronic myeloid leukaemia. Health Technol. Assess. 6(33), 1-162 (2002).
4. Jong GW, van der Linden PD, Bakker EM et al. Unlicensed and off-label drug use in a paediatric ward of a general hospital in the Netherlands. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 58(4), 293-297 (2002).
5. Lindell-Osuagwu L, Korhonen MJ, Saano S, Helin-Tanninen M, Naaranlahti T, Kokki H. Off-label and unlicensed drug prescribing in three paediatric wards in Finland and review of the international literature. J. Clin. Pharm. Ther. 34(3), 277-287 (2009).
6. Caldwell DM, Ades AE, Higgins JP. Simultaneous comparisons of multiple treatments: combining direct and indirect evidence. BMJ 331(7521), 897-900 (2005).
7. Rawlins MD. Therapeutics, Evidence and Decision-Making. Hodder Arnold, London, UK (2011).
8. Jansen JP, Fleurence R, Devine B et al. Interpreting indirect treatment comparisons and network meta-analysis for health-care decision making: report of the ISPOR task force on indirect treatment comparisons good research practices: part 1. Value Health 14(4), 417-428 (2011).
9. Cipriani A, Furukawa TA, Salanti G et al. Comparative efficacy and acceptability of 12 new-generation antidepressants: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis. Lancet 373(9665), 746-755 (2009).
10. Schwarz D, Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutic trials. J. Chronic Dis. 20(8), 637-648 (1967).
11. Quanstrum KH, Hayward RA. Lessons from the mammography wars. N. Engl. J. Med. 363(11), 1076-1078 (2010).
12. Hackshaw A. Benefits and harms of mammography screening. BMJ 344, D8279 (2012).
13. Gotzsche PC, Nielsen M. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 19(1), CD001877 (2011).