首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Current Controlled Trials in Cardiovascular Medicine >Making clinical trials more relevant: improving and validating the PRECIS tool for matching trial design decisions to trial purpose
【2h】

Making clinical trials more relevant: improving and validating the PRECIS tool for matching trial design decisions to trial purpose

机译:使临床试验更加相关:改进和验证PRECIS工具以使试验设计决策与试验目的相匹配

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

BackgroundIf you want to know which of two or more healthcare interventions is most effective, the randomised controlled trial is the design of choice. Randomisation, however, does not itself promote the applicability of the results to situations other than the one in which the trial was done. A tool published in 2009, PRECIS (PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summaries) aimed to help trialists design trials that produced results matched to the aim of the trial, be that supporting clinical decision-making, or increasing knowledge of how an intervention works. Though generally positive, groups evaluating the tool have also found weaknesses, mainly that its inter-rater reliability is not clear, that it needs a scoring system and that some new domains might be needed. The aim of the study is to: Produce an improved and validated version of the PRECIS tool. Use this tool to compare the internal validity of, and effect estimates from, a set of explanatory and pragmatic trials matched by intervention.
机译:背景如果您想知道两种或多种医疗干预措施中哪一种最为有效,则可以选择随机对照试验。但是,随机化本身并不会促进结果在试验以外的情况下的适用性。 PRECIS(实用性解释性连续体指标摘要)是2009年发布的一种工具,旨在帮助临床医师设计能够产生与试验目的相匹配的结果的试验,无论是支持临床决策还是增加干预措施的知识。尽管总体上是积极的,但评估该工具的小组也发现了一些弱点,主要是其评估者之间的可靠性尚不明确,需要评分系统并且可能需要一些新领域。该研究的目的是:产生PRECIS工具的改进和验证版本。使用此工具可以比较一系列干预性解释性和实用性试验的内部有效性和效果评估。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号