ArticleBMC medical research methodology2003
Choosing a control intervention for a randomised clinical trial.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
18 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Ability of a meta-analysis to prevent redundant research: systematic review of studies on pain from propofol injection.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2014Pooled it
- Treatment success in cancer: industry compared to publicly sponsored randomized controlled trials.PloS one · 2013Pooled it
- Are experimental treatments for cancer in children superior to established treatments? Observational study of randomised controlled trials by the Children's Oncology Group.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2005Pooled it
- Evaluation of new treatments in radiation oncology: are they better than standard treatments?JAMA · 2005Pooled it
- The development and description of the comparison group in the Look AHEAD trial.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2011Trial
- Using Normalization Process Theory to Evaluate an End-of-Life Pediatric Palliative Care Web-Based Training Program for Nurses: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
- Methodology for clinical research.Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene · 2022Review
- Article
- Powering Bias and Clinically Important Treatment Effects in Randomized Trials of Critical Illness.Critical care medicine · 2020Article
- Article
- Comparator bias: why comparisons must address genuine uncertainties.Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2013Article
- Challenges to accrual predictions to phase III cancer clinical trials: a survey of study chairs and lead statisticians of 248 NCI-sponsored trials.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2011Article
- Uncertainty and equipoise: at interplay between epistemology, decision making and ethics.The American journal of the medical sciences · 2011Article
- Effectiveness of a hand-held fan for breathlessness: a randomised phase II trial.BMC palliative care · 2010Article
- Preliminary evaluation of factors associated with premature trial closure and feasibility of accrual benchmarks in phase III oncology trials.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2010Article
- Treatment success in cancer: new cancer treatment successes identified in phase 3 randomized controlled trials conducted by the National Cancer Institute-sponsored cooperative oncology groups, 1955 to 2006.Archives of internal medicine · 2008Article
- Ethics and research in critical care.Intensive care medicine · 2006Review
- Controversial choice of a control intervention in a trial of ventilator therapy in ARDS: standard of care arguments in a randomised controlled trial.Journal of medical ethics · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRandomised controlled clinical trials are performed to resolve uncertainty concerning comparator interventions. Appropriate acknowledgment of uncertainty enables the concurrent achievement of two goals : the acquisition of valuable scientific knowledge and an optimum treatment choice for the patient-participant. The ethical recruitment of patients requires the presence of clinical equipoise. This involves the appropriate choice of a control intervention, particularly when unapproved drugs or innovative interventions are being evaluated. DISCUSSION: We argue that the choice of a control intervention should be supported by a systematic review of the relevant literature and, where necessary, solicitation of the informed beliefs of clinical experts through formal surveys and publication of the proposed trial's protocol. SUMMARY: When clinical equipoise is present, physicians may confidently propose trial enrollment to their eligible patients as an act of therapeutic beneficence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.