Abstract
What this topic is about
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the most rigorous way of determining whether a cause–effect relation exists between treatment and outcome and are an integral component in the hierarchy of evidence which guide current clinical practice. Whether ensuring the success of a RCT or interpreting the medical literature, it is important to understand the key components of RCT design to assess their quality and therefore the weight which should be attributed to its findings. This article will highlight some of these key components by using a number of ongoing trauma studies being co-ordinated by the Australian and New Zealand Intensive Care Research Centre, Monash University.
Common problems and challenges
The quality of many RCTs could be improved by avoiding some common pitfalls, such as (i) unclear hypotheses and multiple objectives, (ii) poor selection of endpoints, (iii) inappropriate subject selection criteria, (iv) non-clinically relevant or feasible treatment/intervention regimens, (v) inadequate randomisation, stratification, blinding, (vi) lack of stratification in small RCTs (vii) inadequate blinding of trials, (viii) insufficient sample size/power, (ix) failure to use intention to treat analysis and (x) failure to anticipate common practical problems encountered during the conduct of a RCT.
Tips for researchers
The RCTs most likely to be funded and/or be of high quality always address these issues.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Injury
Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
-
Better reporting of randomised controlled trials: the CONSORT statement.BMJ. 1996; 313: 570-571
-
Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement.JAMA. 1996; 276: 637-639
-
Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury.J Neurotrauma. 2007; : 24
-
Lack of effect of induction of hypothermia after acute brain injury.N Engl J Med. 2001; 344: 556-563
-
Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs.N Engl J Med. 2000; 342: 1887-1892
-
Prehospital hypertonic saline resuscitation of patients with hypotension and severe traumatic brain injury: a randomized controlled trial.J Am Med Assoc. 2004; 291: 1350-1357
-
Size and quality of randomised controlled trials in head injury: review of published studies.BMJ. 2000; 320: 1308-1311
-
Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine.JAMA. 1992; 268: 2420-2425
-
The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized control trial. Survey of 71 “negative” trials.N Engl J Med. 1978; 299: 690-694
-
The randomized controlled trial gets a middle-aged checkup.JAMA. 1998; 279: 319-320
-
The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomized trials.JAMA. 2001; 285: 1987-1991
-
Saline or albumin for fluid resuscitation in patients with traumatic brain injury.N Engl J Med. 2007; 357: 874-884
-
Epidemiology and 12-month outcomes from traumatic brain injury in Australia and New Zealand.J Trauma. 2008; 64: 854-862
-
Randomized versus historical controls for clinical trials.Am J Med. 1982; 72: 233-240
-
Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials.JAMA. 1995; 273: 408-412
-
Randomized controlled trials.Am J Roentgenol. 2004; 183: 1539-1544
-
Content and quality of 2000 controlled trials in schizophrenia over 50 years.BMJ. 1998; 317: 1181-1184
Article info
Identification
Copyright
© 2010 Elsevier Ltd. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
