BMJ : British medical journal
-
Review Meta Analysis
Observer bias in randomised clinical trials with binary outcomes: systematic review of trials with both blinded and non-blinded outcome assessors.
To evaluate the impact of non-blinded outcome assessment on estimated treatment effects in randomised clinical trials with binary outcomes. ⋯ On average, non-blinded assessors of subjective binary outcomes generated substantially biased effect estimates in randomised clinical trials, exaggerating odds ratios by 36%. This bias was compatible with a high rate of agreement between blinded and non-blinded outcome assessors and driven by the misclassification of few patients.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Drugs for relief of pain in patients with sciatica: systematic review and meta-analysis.
To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of analgesic and adjuvant pain drugs typically administered in primary care for the management of patients with sciatica. ⋯ As the existing evidence from clinical trials is of low quality, the efficacy and tolerability of drugs commonly prescribed for the management of sciatica in primary care is unclear.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Effectiveness of non-benzodiazepine hypnotics in treatment of adult insomnia: meta-analysis of data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration.
To investigate the effectiveness of non-benzodiazepine hypnotics (Z drugs) and associated placebo responses in adults and to evaluate potential moderators of effectiveness in a dataset used to approve these drugs. ⋯ Compared with placebo, Z drugs produce slight improvements in subjective and polysomnographic sleep latency, especially with larger doses and regardless of type of drug. Although the drug effect and the placebo response were rather small and of questionable clinical importance, the two together produced to a reasonably large clinical response.
-
Review Meta Analysis
Use of 3x2 tables with an intention to diagnose approach to assess clinical performance of diagnostic tests: meta-analytical evaluation of coronary CT angiography studies.
To determine whether a 3 × 2 table, using an intention to diagnose approach, is better than the "classic" 2 × 2 table at handling transparent reporting and non-evaluable results, when assessing the accuracy of a diagnostic test. ⋯ Parameters for diagnostic performance significantly decrease if non-evaluable results are included by a 3 × 2 table for analysis (intention to diagnose approach). This approach provides a more realistic picture of the clinical potential of diagnostic tests.