|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Questioning Research
Although publication of clinical trial findings in a peer-reviewed journal is a vital step in disseminating emerging research developments, there is a critical need for all readers of oncology literature to approach these reports with a healthy degree of skepticism. Among the important questions that readers should ask are whether the conclusions are truly meaningful to patients and why the study was initiated in the first place......
Although
publication of clinical trial findings in a peer-reviewed journal is a
vital step in disseminating emerging research developments, there is a
critical need for all readers of oncology literature to approach these
reports with a healthy degree of skepticism. Among the important
questions that readers should ask are whether the conclusions are truly
meaningful to patients and why the study was initiated in the first
place.
This commentary offers examples of clinical trials where the interpretation of study results is worthy of considerable additional discussion or where justification for the actual conduct of the study can be called into question. In fact, it is not hard to find studies in the peer-reviewed oncology literature where an objective observer could lodge a serious challenge against the conclusions reached by the study investigators. - See more at: http://www.onclive.com/publications/Oncology-live/2015/march-2015/Controversies-in-Clinical-Care-Questioning-Research#sthash.d2himgx1.dpuf
This commentary offers examples of clinical trials where the interpretation of study results is worthy of considerable additional discussion or where justification for the actual conduct of the study can be called into question. In fact, it is not hard to find studies in the peer-reviewed oncology literature where an objective observer could lodge a serious challenge against the conclusions reached by the study investigators. - See more at: http://www.onclive.com/publications/Oncology-live/2015/march-2015/Controversies-in-Clinical-Care-Questioning-Research#sthash.d2himgx1.dpuf
Although
publication of clinical trial findings in a peer-reviewed journal is a
vital step in disseminating emerging research developments, there is a
critical need for all readers of oncology literature to approach these
reports with a healthy degree of skepticism. Among the important
questions that readers should ask are whether the conclusions are truly
meaningful to patients and why the study was initiated in the first
place.
This commentary offers examples of clinical trials where the interpretation of study results is worthy of considerable additional discussion or where justification for the actual conduct of the study can be called into question. In fact, it is not hard to find studies in the peer-reviewed oncology literature where an objective observer could lodge a serious challenge against the conclusions reached by the study investigators. - See more at: http://www.onclive.com/publications/Oncology-live/2015/march-2015/Controversies-in-Clinical-Care-Questioning-Research#sthash.d2himgx1.dpuf
This commentary offers examples of clinical trials where the interpretation of study results is worthy of considerable additional discussion or where justification for the actual conduct of the study can be called into question. In fact, it is not hard to find studies in the peer-reviewed oncology literature where an objective observer could lodge a serious challenge against the conclusions reached by the study investigators. - See more at: http://www.onclive.com/publications/Oncology-live/2015/march-2015/Controversies-in-Clinical-Care-Questioning-Research#sthash.d2himgx1.dpuf
0 comments :
Post a Comment
Your comments?
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.