ArticleThe British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners1998
Applying the results of clinical trials to patients to general practice: perceived problems, strengths, assumptions, and challenges for the future.
Article in The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1998. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 3 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Intervention effect estimates in randomised controlled trials conducted in primary care versus secondary or tertiary care settings: a meta-epidemiological study.BMC medical research methodology · 2022Pooled it
- Meta- analysis and meta-regression analysis of the associations between sex and the operative outcomes of carotid endarterectomy.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2015Pooled it
- Digital technologies in primary care: Implications for patient care and future research.The European journal of general practice · 2022Article
- Article
- Real-World Utilization of Target- and Immunotherapies for Lung Cancer: A Scoping Review of Studies Based on Routinely Collected Electronic Healthcare Data.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Telehealth and Research in Orthopedics: New Means of Care Invites New Barriers to Evidence.HSS journal : the musculoskeletal journal of Hospital for Special Surgery · 2021Article
- Altmetrics Attention Scores for Randomized Controlled Trials in Total Joint Arthroplasty Are Reflective of High Scientific Quality: An Altmetrics-Based Methodological Quality and Bias Analysis.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2020Article
- Applying machine learning to predict real-world individual treatment effects: insights from a virtual patient cohort.Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association : JAMIA · 2019Article
- Clinical trials in dermatology.International journal of women's dermatology · 2017Review
- The external validity of published randomized controlled trials in primary care.BMC family practice · 2009Article
- Evidence-based protocol for structural rehabilitation of the spine and posture: review of clinical biomechanics of posture (CBP) publications.The Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association · 2005Article
- Evidence-based medicine, heterogeneity of treatment effects, and the trouble with averages.The Milbank quarterly · 2004Article
- Clinical relevance of the gap between pre-marketing trials and medical practice: the case of the cardiovascular drugs.Netherlands heart journal : monthly journal of the Netherlands Society of Cardiology and the Netherlands Heart Foundation · 2002Article
- A clinical informaticist to support primary care decision making.Quality in health care : QHC · 2001Article
- Questioning in general practice--a tool for change.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2000Article
- Performance indicators for primary care groups: an evidence based approach.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 1998Review
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews of RCTs now provide the most robust external evidence about the effectiveness of patient care. There are, however, several assumptions made when applying the results of RCTs to individual patients. This paper aims to outline the perceived barriers against the use of RCTs in practice, while emphasizing the rationale and advantages underlying the approach. A critical discussion concerning the assumptions made when applying evidence from RCTs to individual patients will be presented, with a worked example derived from a patient with acute sinusitis. Finally, proposals concerning the effective implementation of evidence derived from RCTs in the context of individual patient care will be discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
9667097PMC1410058What 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.