Clinical trials
The US National Cancer Institute provides information about clinical trials that is useful to everyone, not just people who are […]
| 0 CommentsNo Resources Found
Try clearing your filters or selecting different ones.
Browse by Key Concept
- Claims: are they justified?
- 1-1 Treatments can harm
- 1-2 Anecdotes are unreliable evidence
- 1-3 Association is not the same as causation
- 1-4 Common practice is not always evidence-based
- 1-5 Newer is not necessarily better
- 1-6 Expert opinion is not always right
- 1-7 Beware of conflicting interests
- 1-8 More is not necessarily better
- 1-9 Earlier is not necessarily better
- 1-10 Hope may lead to unrealistic expectations
- 1-11 Explanations about how treatments work can be wrong
- 1-12 Dramatic treatment effects are rare
- Comparisons: are they fair and reliable?
- 2-1 Comparisons are needed to identify treatment effects
- 2-2 Comparison groups should be similar
- 2-3 Peoples’ outcomes should be analyzed in their original groups
- 2-4 Comparison groups should be treated equally
- 2-5 People should not know which treatment they get
- 2-6 Peoples’ outcomes should be assessed similarly
- 2-7 All should be followed up
- 2-8 Consider all of the relevant fair comparisons
- 2-9 Reviews of fair comparisons should be systematic
- 2-10 Peer-review and publication does not guarantee reliable information
- 2-11 All fair comparisons and outcomes should be reported
- 2-12 Subgroup analyses may be misleading
- 2-13 Relative measures of effects can be misleading
- 2-14 Average measures of effects can be misleading
- 2-15 Fair comparisons with few people or outcome events can be misleading
- 2-16 Confidence intervals should be reported
- 2-17 Don’t confuse “statistical significance” with “importance”
- 2-18 Don’t confuse “no evidence” with “no effect”
- Choices: making informed choices