Read full paper at:
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=53462#.VMXpryzQrzE
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=53462#.VMXpryzQrzE
ABSTRACT
The
amount of scientific knowledge from randomized parallel group trials
have been improved by the CONSORT Guideline, but important intelligence
with important clinical implications remains to be extracted. This may
though be obtained if the conventional statistical significance testing
is supplied by 1) Addition of an unbiased and reproducible
quantification of the magnitude or size of the clinical
significance/importance of a difference in treatment outcome; 2)
Addition of a quantification of the credulity of statements on any
possible effect size and finally; 3) Addition of a quantification of the
risk of committing an error when the null hypothesis is either accepted
or rejected. These matters are crucial to proper conversion of trial
results into good usage in every-day clinical practice and may produce
immediate therapeutic consequence in quite opposite direction to the
usual ones. In our drug eluting stent trial “SORT OUT II”, the
implementation of our suggestions would have led to immediate cessation
of use of the paclitaxel-eluting stent, which the usual Consort like
reporting did not lead to. Consequently harm to subsequent patients
treated by this stent might have been avoided. Our suggestions are also
useful in cancer treatment trials and in fact generally so in most
randomized trial. Therefore increased scientific knowledge with
immediate and potentially altered clinical consequence may be the result
if hypothesis testing is made complete and the corresponding
adjustments are added to the CONSORT Guideline—first of all— for the
potential benefit of future patients.
Cite this paper
References
Galløe,
A. and Larsen, C. (2015) Some Methods to Maximize Extraction of
Scientific Knowledge from Parallel Group Randomized Trials. World Journal of Cardiovascular Diseases, 5, 19-26. doi: 10.4236/wjcd.2015.51003.
| [1] | Moher,
D., Hopewell, S., Schulz, K.F., et al. (2010) CONSORT 2010 Explanation
and Elaboration: Updated Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group
Randomised Trials. British Medical Journal, 340, c869. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c869 |
| [2] | Schulz,
K.F., Altman, D.G. and Moher, D. (2010) CONSORT 2010 Statement: Updated
Guidelines for Reporting Parallel Group Randomised Trials. British
Medical Journal, 340, c332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c332 |
| [3] | Moher,
D., Schulz, K.F. and Altman, D.G. (2001) The CONSORT Statement: Revised
Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group
Randomized Trials. Journal of the American Medical Association, 285,
1987-1991. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.285.15.1987 |
| [4] | Gliner,
J.A., Leech, N.L. and Morgan, G.A. (2002) Problems with Null Hypothesis
Testing (NHST): What Do the Textbooks Say? The Journal of Experimental
Education, 71, 83-92. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220970209602058 |
| [5] | Galloe,
A.M., Thuesen, L., Kelbaek, H., et al. (2008) Comparison of Paclitaxel-
and Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Everyday Clinical Practice: The SORT
OUT II Randomized Trial. Journal of the American Medical Association,
299, 409-416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/jama.299.4.409 |
| [6] | Bligaard,
N., Thuesen, L., Saunamaki, K., et al. (2014) Similar Five-Year Outcome
with Paclitaxel- and Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents. Scandinavian
Cardiovascular Journal, 48, 148-155. http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/14017431.2014.883461 |
| [7] | Spiegel, M.R. (1980) Schaum’s Outline of Theory and Problems of Probability and Statistics. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York. |
| [8] | Staguet, M.J., Rozenweig, M., Von Hoff, D.D., et al. (1979) The Delta and Epsilon Errors in Assessment of Cancer Clinical Trials. Cancer Treatment Reports, 63, 1917-1921. |
| [9] | Schomig,
A., Dibra, A., Windecker, S., et al. (2007) A Meta Analysis of 16
Randomized Trials of Sirolimus-Eluting versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents
in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease. Journal of the American
College of Cardiology, 50, 1173-1180. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2007.06.047 eww150126lx |
评论
发表评论