how to appraise a clinical trial critically
Clicks: 74
ID: 242375
1995
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
21.9
/100
74 views
17 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #207 of 250 articles by views in indian journal of pharmacology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 250 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Most clinicians wish to base their therapeutic decisions on scientific data but are often overwhelmed by the number of case reports, open series and other therapeutic trials published each year. It is essential to develop a personal screening plan that can alert the clinician to which reports deserve extra attention, as they may alter management, and to which reports can be ignored. The first step is to review the abstract. Decisions related to therapeutics should be based on ‘randomized’, ‘controlled’, ‘double-blinded’, ‘clinical trials’. If these key words are not included in the abstract, it is unlikely that the report will change clinical practice. Each of these terms describes an essential element that attempts to assure that the results of the trial will be unbiased and generally applicable to clinical practice. The next step is to examine the ‘Methods’ section. Clinicians should be interested in the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Two questions arise. First, do the study participants resemble patients in your practice? Second, how many patients were assessed in order to enrol the study population? If only a few of the patients screened actually entered the trial the results may not be of use for the general population with the disease. Another important screening process is to review the ‘Statistical’ section. It is not necessary to be a statistician, but one should read the section to determine whether a sample size calculation was performed and whether confidence intervals have been calculated around the major end-points. By remembering these key concepts, clinicians can reduce the number of journal articles they read without compromising their ability to be informed of major breakthroughs in the management of disease.
| Reference Key |
sutherland1995canadianhow
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Lloyd R Sutherland |
| Journal | indian journal of pharmacology |
| Year | 1995 |
| DOI |
10.1155/1995/810296
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.