Randomized Controlled Trials and Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials Reporting Quality: An Evidence-Based Analysis of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, American Burn Association, and American Society for Surgery of the Hand Conference Meetings

AbstractThere is a growth in the demand for clinical practice to be evidence based. Recent years have seen a rise in the number of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTS). Such trials while acknowledged as the gold standard for evidence can be difficult to perform in surgical specialities. We have recently identified a low proportion of RCTS in the otolaryngology literature. Our aim was to identify any trend in the number of published RCTS within the ENT literature over a 30-year period and to identify which areas of our speciality lend themselves to this form of study design. A Medline search of 10 prominent journals published between 1966 and 1995 was performed. Two hundred and ninety-six RCTS were identified. Only five were published before 1980. Two hundred (71 per cent) of RCTS were in the areas of otology and rhinology. An encouraging trend is seen in RCTS within ENT literature.

Download Full-text

Evidence-based urology in practice: randomized controlled trials stopped early for benefit

BJU International ◽

10.1111/j.1464-410x.2010.09542.x ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 106 (7) ◽

pp. 962-963 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Steven E. Canfield ◽

Shahnaz Sultan ◽

Philipp Dahm

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Randomized Controlled

Download Full-text

Breast Cancer Research to Support Evidence-Based Medicine in Nigeria: A Review of the Literature

JCO Global Oncology ◽

10.1200/go.20.00541 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 384-390

Author(s):

Omolara A. Fatiregun ◽

Temiloluwa Oluokun ◽

Nwamaka N. Lasebikan ◽

Emmanuella Nwachukwu ◽

Abiola A. Ibraheem ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Cancer Research ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Evidence Based Medicine ◽

Treatment Guidelines ◽

Breast Cancer Research ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Based Medicine

PURPOSE Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women worldwide. In Nigeria, it accounts for 22.7% of all new cancer cases among women. Evidence-based medicine (EBM) entails using the results from healthcare research to enhance the clinical decision-making process and develop evidence-based treatment guidelines. Level 1 and 2 studies, such as randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials, yield more robust types of evidence. This study reviewed the levels of evidence of breast cancer publications in Nigeria. METHODS We conducted an electronic literature search of all studies published on breast cancer in Nigeria from January 1961 to August 2019. We reviewed all the articles found under the search term “Breast Cancer in Nigeria” on medical databases. RESULTS Our search identified 2,242 publications. One thousand two hundred fifty duplicates were removed, and 520 were excluded. A total of 472 articles were considered eligible for this review. Most of these articles were case series or reports (30.7%), qualitative studies (15.7%), followed by cross-sectional studies (13.3%), laboratory studies (12.9%), case-control studies (6.1%), case reports (7%), and cohort (5.7%). CONCLUSION Breast cancer research in Nigeria is yet to produce much evidence of the types considered to best support EBM. The scarcity of data hampers the implementation of EBM in Nigeria. Currently, most treatment guidelines are adapted from those developed in other countries, despite genetic differences among populations and different environmental influencing factors.

Download Full-text

Clinical Importance of Evidence Based Therapy for Diabetes Type 2

Saudi Journal of Internal Medicine ◽

10.32790/sjim.2.2.5 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 2 (2) ◽

pp. 21-24

Author(s):

Mohammad A. Bajubair

Keyword(s):

Heart Disease ◽

Ischemic Heart Disease ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Oral Treatment ◽

Ischemic Heart ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Evidence Based Therapy

Objectives: Not all practice guidelines on oral treatment of Type 2 diabetes were consistent with available evidences. Our aim was to explore the necessity of following the new clinical evidences in treatment of diabetes mellitus Type 2 in clinical practice and the availability of randomized controlled trials in literature used. Methods: Cross-sectional interview survey of 20 physicians in the Internal Medicine Departments in Althawra Teaching Hospital, University of Sana'a, Yemen, to understand the drug used in T2DM in regards to the clinically evidenced trials. The three commonly used literatures were studied for the availability of randomized controlled trials s and the systematic reviews. Results: Examples of drugs to be considered in special correlation and contradiction were metformin and thiazolidinediones (rosi-, pioglitazone). Fear of lactic acidosis was seen in 45% of physicians. Ischemic Heart disease and failure represent the commonest cause of glitazones avoidance, especially for rosiglitazone (100% vs. 50% for pioglitazone). Example of drugs used were with no agreements of their benefit are gabapentin (35%) and neurobion (30%) for neuropathy prevention. In the side effect consideration, metformin was still considered dangerous, and B-blockers hesitation in ischemic heart disease prevention. The main source of information used by physicians was Davidson's Medicine, British national formulary and pharmaceutical marketing leaflets. Conclusions: Inconsistency between the tested physicians may be improved by better access and implementation of evidence-based therapy and guidelines in T2DM.

Download Full-text

What does evidence-based medicine tell us about treatments for different subtypes of psoriatic arthritis? A systematic literature review on randomized controlled trials

Rheumatology Advances in Practice ◽

10.1093/rap/rkx019 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Sibel Bakirci Ureyen ◽

Catherine Ivory ◽

Umut Kalyoncu ◽

Jacob Karsh ◽

Sibel Zehra Aydin

Keyword(s):

Psoriatic Arthritis ◽

Literature Review ◽

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Systematic Literature Review ◽

Evidence Based Medicine ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Evidence Based ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Based Medicine

Download Full-text

Choosing PD-1 Inhibitors in Oncology Setting, Left or Right?—Lessons From Value Assessment With ASCO-VF and ESMO-MCBS

Frontiers in Pharmacology ◽

10.3389/fphar.2020.574511 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 11 ◽

Author(s):

Qian Jiang ◽

Mei Feng ◽

Youping Li ◽

Jinyi Lang ◽

Hua Wei ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trials ◽

Cell Carcinoma ◽

Assessment Tools ◽

Cutoff Score ◽

Controlled Trials ◽

Value Assessment ◽

Monthly Cost ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Dramatic Rise ◽

American Society

Background: Influx of innovative therapies and dramatic rise in prices have been prompting value-driven decision-making. Both the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) have independently proposed value assessment frameworks.Objectives: To comprehensively examine the value of nivolumab and pembrolizumab by two value assessment frameworks with a cohort of published randomized controlled trials and offer insight into the association between these two frameworks.Methods: Trials were identified with a cutoff date of Nov 30th, 2019. Receiver operating characteristic curves were generated to establish the predictive value of ASCO-VF score to meet ESMO-MCBS grade and discriminate the agreement of these two value assessment tools. Spearman correlation was used to assess the association between monthly cost and ASCO-VF score/ESMO-MCBS grade. Results: 19 randomized controlled trials were eligible. seven (36.8%) trials were of treatment included nivolumab while 12 (63.2%) pembrolizumab. 8 (42.1%) of the trials were of treatments for non-small-cell lung cancer, 5 (26.3%) for melanoma, 2 (10.5%) were for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, 2 (10.5%) for gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer and 1 (5.3%) for urothelial cancer and renal-cell carcinoma respectively. ASCO scores ranged from 7 to 94.7 with median 40.90. 11 (57.9%) trials met the ESMO criteria for meaningful value achieved. Of 14 trials not meeting the ASCO cutoff score, only 8 did not meet the meaningful ESMO criteria. Agreement between these two frameworks thresholds was only fair (κ = 0.412, P＜0.05). A negative correlation was noted between increment monthly cost and value assessment results.Conclusion: There is only fair correlation between ASCO and ESMO value assessment frameworks. Not all treatment with nivolumab and pembrolizumab meet valuable thresholds.

Download Full-text