Randomized clinical trials and observational studies: Is there a battle?

Journal of Clinical Oncology

Volumn 34, Issue 8, 2016, Pages 772-773

  Chavez MacGregor, Mariana ^a   Giordano, Sharon H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BREAST CANCER; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SURGERY; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; EDITORIAL; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); TREATMENT RESPONSE; METHODOLOGY;

HUMANS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 84961165421     PISSN: 0732183X     EISSN: 15277755     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2015.64.7487     Document Type: Editorial

References (21)

1. Rosenberg W, Donald A: Evidence based medicine: An approach to clinical problem-solving. BMJ 310:1122-1126, 1995
2. Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, et al: Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it isn't. BMJ 312:71-72, 1996
3. Sackett D. Evidence-based medicine. How to practice and teach EBM (ed 2). New York, NY, Churchill Livingstone, 1997
4. A Dictionary of Epidemiology (ed 4). New York, NY, Oxford University Press, 2001.
5. Jenicek M: Evidence-based medicine: Fifteen years later. Golem the good, the bad, and the ugly in need of a review? Med Sci Monit 12:RA241-RA251, 2006
6. Sniderman AD, La Chapelle KJ, Rachon NA, et al: The necessity for clinical reasoning in the era of evidence-based medicine. Mayo Clin Proc 88:1108-1114, 2013
7. Vandenbroucke JP: When are observational studies as credible as randomised trials? Lancet 363:1728-1731, 2004
8. Fisher RA: Statistical methods, experimental design, and scientific inference. Oxford, United Kingdom, Oxford University Press, 1990
9. Hutchins LF, Unger JM, Crowley JJ, et al: Underrepresentation of patients 65 years of age or older in cancer-treatment trials. N Engl J Med 341:2061-2067, 1999
10. Giordano SH: Comparative effectiveness research in cancer with observational data. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 35:e330-e335, 2015
11. Hershman DL, Wright JD: Comparative effectiveness research in oncology methodology: Observational data. J Clin Oncol 30:4215-4222, 2012
12. Henson KE, Jagsi R, Cutter D, et al: Inferring the effects of cancer treatment: Divergent results from the Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group meta-analyses of randomized trials and observational data from SEER registries. J Clin Oncol 34:803-809, 2016
13. Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz RI: Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med 342:1887-1892, 2000
14. Benson K, Hartz AJ: A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med 342:1878-1886, 2000
15. Vandenbroucke JP: The HRT controversy: Observational studies and RCTs fall in line. Lancet 373:1233-1235, 2009
16. Giordano SH, Kuo YF, Duan Z, et al: Limits of observational data in determining outcomes from cancer therapy. Cancer 112:2456-2466, 2008
17. Psaty BM, Siscovick DS: Minimizing bias due to confounding by indication in comparative effectiveness research: The importance of restriction. JAMA 304: 897-898, 2010
18. Salas M, Hofman A, Stricker BH: Confounding by indication: An example of variation in the use of epidemiologic terminology. Am J Epidemiol 149:981-983, 1999
19. Dreyer NA, Schneeweiss S, Mc Neil BJ, et al: GRACE Initiative: GRACE principles: Recognizing high-quality observational studies of comparative effectiveness. Am J Manag Care 16:467-471, 2010
20. Agency for Health Care Research and Quality: Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews. (AHRQ Publication no. 10(14)-EHC063EF.) Rockville MD, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2014
21. Hill AB: Reflections on controlled trial. Ann Rheum Dis 25:107-113, 1966