Random clinical trials VS - Random clinical trials VS....

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Random clinical trials VS. sensitivity tests According to Feinstein (1983), "although highly successful in investigating remedial therapy, randomized clinical trials have sometimes created rather than clarified controversy when the treatments were given for the complex problems involved in studying either the primary prevention of disease or the secondary prevention of adverse progression for an established disease. Another source of difficulty has been the inevitable conflicts created by two legitimate and justifiable but opposing policies regarding the fastidious or pragmatic goals of the trials. These problems limit the scope of clinical questions that can be answered successfully by randomized trials, but other limitations are produced by problems in logistics or ethics" (p.544). "Randomized trials are unfeasible for studying multiple therapeutic candidates, minor changes in therapy, "instabilities" due to rapid technologic improvements in
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 2

Random clinical trials VS - Random clinical trials VS....

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online