Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the cornerstone of modern evidence-based medicine. They are considered essential to establish definitive evidence of efficacy and safety for new drugs, and whenever possible they should also be the preferred method for investigating new high-risk medical devices. Well-designed studies robustly inform clinical practice guidelines and decision-making, but administrative obstacles have made it increasingly difficult to conduct informative RCTs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFThe complexity of today's scenario has made it necessary to investigate the need for individuals to make choices that entail increasing exposure to risk and uncertainty. Among the individual resources that could help people to cope with situations of uncertainty, the new construct of subjective risk intelligence (SRI), known as a person's ability to effectively weigh the pros and cons of a decision in situations where not all the outcomes are foreseen, would seem to play a prominent role. Considering that personality and coping strategies have been shown to be significantly related in previous research, the present study investigates the relationships between subjective risk intelligence, emotional intelligence, personality traits and coping strategies in both adults and adolescents.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFBackground: Results from multiple randomized clinical trials comparing outcomes after intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)- and optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with invasive coronary angiography (ICA)-guided PCI as well as a pivotal trial comparing the 2 intravascular imaging (IVI) techniques have provided mixed results.
Methods: Major electronic databases were searched to identify eligible trials evaluating at least 2 PCI guidance strategies among ICA, IVUS, and OCT. The 2 coprimary outcomes were target lesion revascularization and myocardial infarction.