There's madness in their methods - a response to: Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: Do trial results enable clinicians and patients to evaluate whether the benefits justify the risk? Proceedings of an Ad Hoc Working Group Meeting

摘要

The American College of Chest Physicians (ACCP) had distinguished itself in previous decades as a producer of excellent 'antithrombotic' guidelines used worldwide; guidelines that dealt simply and primarily with evidence and not opinion. Sadly, in the last decade methodologists have hijacked the role of the ACCP panellists, their analyses, and their writing. This is revealed in a letter sent to the journal recently, which discusses the reliability of clinical trial data [1]. This subject is at the heart of the changes to the ACCP 2012 recommendations [2], which shares a number of authors with this letter [1].