Pros and cons of pragmatic clinical trials.

J Comp Eff Res

Department of Medicine, Geisel School of Medicine, One Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH 03756, USA.

Published: January 2013

Traditional randomized controlled trials are the 'gold standard' for evaluating health interventions and are typically designed to maximize internal validity, often at the cost of limited generalizability. Pragmatic randomized controlled trials should be designed with a conscious effort to generate evidence with a greater external validity by making the research question as similar as possible to the questions faced by clinical decision-makers (i.e., patients and their families, physicians, policy makers and administrators) and then answer that question with rigor. Clarity and transparency about the specifics of the research question are the keys to designing, as well as interpreting, any clinical trial.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2217/cer.12.74DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

randomized controlled
8
controlled trials
8
pros cons
4
cons pragmatic
4
pragmatic clinical
4
clinical trials
4
trials traditional
4
traditional randomized
4
trials 'gold
4
'gold standard'
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!