scholarly journals Links Between Arts and Health, Examples From Quantitative Intervention Evaluations

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Töres Theorell
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Statistical Methods ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Statistical Power ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Health Development ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Arts And Health ◽  
Scientific Context

The author presents eight of his own group’s studies. They have been published from early 1980s until 2016. Each study will be placed in its scientific context and discussed in relation to possible progress in arts and health research. In these examples, statistical methods with longitudinal designs and mostly control groups have been used. Some of them are randomized controlled trials. Physiological and endocrinological variables have been assessed in some of these studies in efforts to increase our understanding of how music experiences and other kinds of arts experiences interact with bodily reactions of relevance for health development. Although some of the studies have suffered from low statistical power and other methodological weaknesses, they show that it is possible to do statistical evaluations of arts interventions aiming at improved health.

Statistical Power for Analyses of Changes in Randomized Controlled Trials

2005 ◽  
Vol 84 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-287 ◽  
Author(s):  
Y.-K. Tu ◽  
A. Blance ◽  
V. Clerehugh ◽  
M.S. Gilthorpe
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Statistical Methods ◽  
Statistical Power ◽  
Change Score ◽  
Error Rates ◽  
Analysis Of Covariance ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Multivariate Statistical ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Study Power

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are widely recommended as the most useful study design to generate reliable evidence and guidance to daily practices in medicine and dentistry. However, it is not well-known in dental research that different statistical methods of data analysis can yield substantial differences in study power. In this study, computer simulations are used to explore how using different univariate and multivariate statistical methods of analyzing change in continuous outcome variables affects study power, and the sample size required for RCTs. Results show that, in general, analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) yields greater power than other statistical methods in testing the superiority of one treatment over another, or in testing the equivalence between two treatments. Therefore, ANCOVA should be used in preference to change score or percentage change score to reduce type II error rates.

An introduction to research

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daisy Fancourt
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
The Arts ◽  
Arts And Health ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Arts In Health

This chapter explores what we mean by ‘research’ in relation to arts in health: what its purpose is and how it differs from evaluation or audits. It questions whether arts in health research is ‘exceptional’ or different from other sorts of research in health, examining some of the most frequent misconceptions about research in this field. It also considers some of the debates around issues such as whether the arts can be assessed using randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and how quantitative research can capture the essence of an arts intervention. It explores different types of disciplinary working and proposes how the arts and health can be researched effectively together. Finally, the chapter provides top tips for research and recommends journals and conferences for keeping up-to-date with research findings.

scholarly journals The Effectiveness of Tocilizumab in the Treatment of COVID-19 in Adults: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chun Chen ◽  
ZeMei Zhou ◽  
Jing Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Hospital Discharge ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Composite Outcome ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Serious Infection ◽  
And Control

Abstract Background: Since December 2019, COVID-19 has spread to the world which leads to a global health threat. We aimed to investigate the effectiveness of tocilizumab on COVID-19 patients.Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and WHO international Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) from their inception to March 10, 2021 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on tocilizumab supplementation in adults with COVID-19 disease. The primary outcomes were mortality at 28-30 day and 60-day, incidence of mechanical ventilation (MV), composite outcome of death or MV, time to hospital discharge, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions. A random-effects meta-analysis model was used to pool studies. Results: Eleven studies with a total of 6,579 patients were included in our meta-analysis, of which 3,406 and 3,173 were respectively assigned to the tocilizumab and control groups. Tocilizumab could significantly reduce 28-30 day mortality (RR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.80-0.99, P = 0.04), incidence of MV (RR= 0.79, 95% CI 0.71-0.89, P = 0.0001), composition outcome of MV or death (RR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.72-0.90, P = 0.0002), time to hospital discharge (HR = 1.30, 95% CI 1.16-1.45, P ＜ 0.00001 ), ICU admissions (RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.47-0.88, P = 0.006), serious infection (RR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.40-0.94, P = 0.02) and events of serious adverse advents (RR = 0.64, 95% CI 0.47-0.86, P = 0.004). There was no significant difference between tocilizumab and control groups in 60-day mortality and adverse events (AEs).Conclusions: Tocilizumab could reduce the short-term mortality, incidence of MV, composite outcome of death or MV, ICU admissions, serious infection and events of serious adverse advents, and shorten the time to hospital discharge in hospitalized patients with COVID-19. The optimal effective dose needs to be confirmed by further studies.

Clinical Trials

Anthropology ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Salla Sariola
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Global Health ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Knowledge Production ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Care Providers ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Production Processes

Clinical trials are tests of safety and efficacy for drugs, vaccines, and diagnostics. Methods by with which trials are conducted include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and equivalence studies. Randomized controlled trials compare an experimental compound with a placebo, or a previously existing drug, seeking to establish safety and/or efficacy. RCTs can also be conducted on social interventions or policies. According to current standards, trials are conducted in phases, cumulatively including more participants. So called phase I trials are “first-in-man” studies, prior to which animal studies have been conducted. Phases II and III include a higher number of study participants, often in thousands across the world. After phase III, marketing permission is sought—phases IV and V are used to promote the products and gather further evidence of side effects. Trials are also conducted to compare the equivalence of existing and remanufactured products, extend patents of the patent holder, and gain a hold of a new market, resulting in what is at times called “me-too”-drugs. Trials are conducted by public/global health researchers, pharmaceutical companies, and public-private partnerships all of which entail a complex web of actors. Anthropological literature exploring clinical trials has increased since the 2000s and the field reflects a global increase of overseas research by various biomedical actors. Clinical trials are not a new phenomenon, but their recent trajectory and shifting geographical locations has rendered them an object of inquiry. The increase is a consequence of multiple processes including global regulatory changes, emergence of new bilateral actors, and the overall development in countries like India and China that have increased their capacity for knowledge production. Within anthropology, the interest has coincided with and compounded research on globalization and global assemblages that has focused on webs and networks of technologies, ethics, and financial actors. Knowledge production processes have also illuminated the “ontological turn” in anthropology that has explored practices that give rise to objects, materiality, and biology. Following practices that construct pharmaceuticals illuminates the ways in which life itself, bodies, and biologies are socially constructed. Such approach, while not always explicitly, takes inspiration from Bruno Latour’s Actor-Network Theory and science and technology studies. Knowledge production processes are not devoid of power, and a major concern in the literature is the potential for exploitation of research participants, researchers, and local research cultures. In sites where global health research is conducted, health systems are often poor, and strongly divided between public and private health-care providers. Anthropology in/of clinical trials has engendered social scientists’ roles in working also in collaboration with medical researchers and thinking about the social relationships and ethics of international research, justice and universality of values, how to promote the interests and concerns of communities, and how indeed research bioethical regulation itself is a product of neoliberalization of health research.

scholarly journals Systematic Review and Pooled Analyses of Recent Neurointerventional Randomized Controlled Trials: Setting a New Standard of Care for Acute Ischemic Stroke Treatment after 20 Years

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 39-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mohammed Hussain ◽  
Mohammad Moussavi ◽  
Daniel Korya ◽  
Siddhart Mehta ◽  
Jaskiran Brar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Ischemic Stroke ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Endovascular Therapy ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
And Control ◽  
Iv Tpa

Background: Recent advances in the treatment of ischemic stroke have focused on revascularization and led to better clinical and functional outcomes. A systematic review and pooled analyses of 6 recent multicentered prospective randomized controlled trials (MPRCT) were performed to compare intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IV tPA) and endovascular therapy (intervention) with IV tPA alone (control) for anterior circulation ischemic stroke (AIS) secondary to large vessel occlusion (LVO). Objectives: Six MPRCTs (MR CLEAN, ESCAPE, EXTEND IA, SWIFT PRIME, REVASCAT and THERAPY) incorporating image-based LVO AIS were selected for assessing the following: (1) prespecified primary clinical outcomes of AIS patients in intervention and control arms: good outcomes were defined by a modified Rankin Scale score of 0-2 at 90 days; (2) secondary clinical outcomes were: (a) revascularization rates [favorable outcomes defined as modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction scale (mTICI) score of 2b/3]; (b) symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage (sICH) rates and mortality; (c) derivation of number needed to harm (NNH), number needed to treat (NNT), and relative percent difference (RPD) between intervention and control groups, and (d) random effects model to determine overall significance (forest and funnel plots). Results: A total of 1,386 patients were included. Good outcomes at 90 days were seen in 46% of patients in the intervention (p < 0.00001) and in 27% of patients in the control groups (p < 0.00002). An mTICI score of 2b/3 was achieved in 70.2% of patients in the intervention arm. The sICH and mortality in the intervention arm compared with the control arm were 4.7 and 14.3% versus 7.9 and 17.8%, respectively. The NNT and NNH in the intervention and control groups were 5.3 and 9.1, respectively. Patients in the intervention arm had a 50.1% (RPD) better chance of achieving a good 90-day outcome as compared to controls. Conclusions: Endovascular therapy combined with IV tPA (in appropriately selected patients) for LVO-related AIS is superior to IV tPA alone. These results support establishing an endovascular therapy in addition to IV tPA as the standard of care for AIS secondary to LVO.

scholarly journals Statistical power considerations in genotype-based recall randomized controlled trials

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Naeimeh Atabaki-Pasdar ◽  
Mattias Ohlsson ◽  
Dmitry Shungin ◽  
Azra Kurbasic ◽  
Erik Ingelsson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Statistical Power ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document