In the Era of Systematic Reviews, Does the Size of an Individual Trial Still Matter?
نویسندگان
چکیده
BACKGROUND TO THE DEBATE Systematic reviews that combine high-quality evidence from several trials are now widely considered to be at the top of the hierarchy of clinical evidence. Given the primacy of systematic reviews-and the fact that individual clinical trials rarely provide definitive answers to a clinical research question-some commentators question whether the sample size calculation for an individual trial still matters. Others point out that small trials can still be potentially misleading.
منابع مشابه
Reporting of Financial and Non-financial Conflicts of Interest in Systematic Reviews on Health Policy and Systems Research: A Cross Sectional Survey
Background Systematic reviews are increasingly used to inform health policy-making. The conflicts of interest (COI) of the authors of systematic reviews may bias their results and influence their conclusions. This may in turn lead to misguided public policies and systems level decisions. In order to mitigate the adverse impact of COI, scientific journals require authors to disclose their COIs. ...
متن کاملFaculty Members’ Development in Agricultural Higher Education: Does the university size matter?
Higher education has recently faced new challenges and responsibilities such as higher expectations to contribute to national and regional developments; considerable cuts in public funds, and the highly competitive educational markets. Previous research has suggested a positive association between development of human capitals in higher education institutions and their capacity to deal with the...
متن کاملDiverse types of review studies based on their approach to retrieving and summarizing original findings
Background: We are living in an era in which different branches of science are growing very rapidly. Therefore, retrieving and summarizing all new valid findings on a specific subject is one of the most important priorities of scientists. The aim of the present article is to categorize different review studies within the health domain based on their approach to retrieving and summarizing ...
متن کاملSome Notes on Critical Appraisal of Prevalence Studies; Comment on: “The Development of a Critical Appraisal Tool for Use in Systematic Reviews Addressing Questions of Prevalence”
Decisions in healthcare should be based on information obtained according to the principles of Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM). An increasing number of systematic reviews are published which summarize the results of prevalence studies. Interpretation of the results of these reviews should be accompanied by an appraisal of the methodological quality of the included data and studies. The critical a...
متن کاملThe Development of a Critical Appraisal Tool for Use in Systematic Reviews: Addressing Questions of Prevalence
Background Recently there has been a significant increase in the number of systematic reviews addressing questions of prevalence. Key features of a systematic review include the creation of an a priori protocol, clear inclusion criteria, a structured and systematic search process, critical appraisal of studies, and a formal process of data extraction followed by methods to synthesize, or combin...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
عنوان ژورنال:
- PLoS Medicine
دوره 5 شماره
صفحات -
تاریخ انتشار 2008