Die Vision einer pragmatischen klinischen Forschung oder das Ende der Diskussion über <> und <>

Q Medicine
Schmidt
{"title":"Die Vision einer pragmatischen klinischen Forschung oder das Ende der Diskussion über <<Placebo>> und <<spezifische Wirkungen>>","authors":"Schmidt","doi":"10.1159/000021086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Concept of Pragmatic Clinical Research or the End of Discussion about 'Placebo' and 'Specific Effects&rsquoThe reorientation of clinical research towards the questions of treatment benefit (beyond the question of treatment efficacy) and of how much clinical trials represent actual practice (external validity) is the timely path to clinical research questions of real interest and importance. Postmodern 'anything goes' makes it possible to also consider thus far looked down on placebo effects as valuable, however, it requires the precise documentation of the external validity of such effects. Not disease as such, but the disease context, not therapy as such, but the therapy context, not the patient as such, but the patient context, not a test as such, but the test situation have become the important focuses of clinical research. In respect to test results current medicine has to recognize its illiterate mystification of allegedly 'objective' and 'hard' data. The patient context can determine whether an 'efficacious' therapy is beneficial or harmful, and thus, it is the proper definition of the patient context which makes medicine scientific, no matter how 'objective' or 'subjective' the effect of therapy is. The consideration of the therapy context leads to the important distinction between efficacy and effectiveness (or benefit), and it becomes intelligible that the randomised controlled trial in its traditional design as the placebo-controlled double-blind trial is limited to the evaluation of an agent theory. The evaluation of treatment effectiveness requires more pragmatic trials which study treatment operations and not isolated components and which may even compare entire treatment strategies. Pragmatic clinical trials, in future, will not only allow the study of 'pathogenesis blockers'., but also the study of 'salutogenetic' interventions working with the formation of the host. The focus of attention and research in the new school of evidencebased medicine with clinical epidemiology as its basic science (if not superficially understood as mere literature medicine) has long ago been identified as illness as the product of host, disease and environment. The dispute about 'placebo' and 'specific effects', in the meantime, has become obsolete.</p>","PeriodicalId":54318,"journal":{"name":"Forschende Komplementarmedizin","volume":"5 Suppl S1 ","pages":"102-111"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000021086","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forschende Komplementarmedizin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000021086","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Concept of Pragmatic Clinical Research or the End of Discussion about 'Placebo' and 'Specific Effects&rsquoThe reorientation of clinical research towards the questions of treatment benefit (beyond the question of treatment efficacy) and of how much clinical trials represent actual practice (external validity) is the timely path to clinical research questions of real interest and importance. Postmodern 'anything goes' makes it possible to also consider thus far looked down on placebo effects as valuable, however, it requires the precise documentation of the external validity of such effects. Not disease as such, but the disease context, not therapy as such, but the therapy context, not the patient as such, but the patient context, not a test as such, but the test situation have become the important focuses of clinical research. In respect to test results current medicine has to recognize its illiterate mystification of allegedly 'objective' and 'hard' data. The patient context can determine whether an 'efficacious' therapy is beneficial or harmful, and thus, it is the proper definition of the patient context which makes medicine scientific, no matter how 'objective' or 'subjective' the effect of therapy is. The consideration of the therapy context leads to the important distinction between efficacy and effectiveness (or benefit), and it becomes intelligible that the randomised controlled trial in its traditional design as the placebo-controlled double-blind trial is limited to the evaluation of an agent theory. The evaluation of treatment effectiveness requires more pragmatic trials which study treatment operations and not isolated components and which may even compare entire treatment strategies. Pragmatic clinical trials, in future, will not only allow the study of 'pathogenesis blockers'., but also the study of 'salutogenetic' interventions working with the formation of the host. The focus of attention and research in the new school of evidencebased medicine with clinical epidemiology as its basic science (if not superficially understood as mere literature medicine) has long ago been identified as illness as the product of host, disease and environment. The dispute about 'placebo' and 'specific effects', in the meantime, has become obsolete.

制定一个现实的临床研究方案或者停止讨论>和>
实用临床研究的概念或关于“安慰剂”和“特异性效应”的讨论的结束临床研究重新定位于治疗效益问题(超越治疗疗效问题)和临床试验代表实际实践的程度(外部有效性),是解决真正感兴趣和重要的临床研究问题的及时途径。后现代主义的“一切皆有可能”使得迄今为止被轻视的安慰剂效应也有可能被认为是有价值的,然而,这需要对这种效应的外部有效性进行精确的记录。不是疾病本身,而是疾病背景,不是治疗本身,而是治疗背景,不是病人本身,而是病人本身,不是测试本身,而是测试情境已经成为临床研究的重要焦点。在测试结果方面,目前的医学必须认识到它对所谓的“客观”和“硬”数据的无知神秘化。患者环境可以决定“有效”的治疗是有益的还是有害的,因此,无论治疗效果是“客观的”还是“主观的”,对患者环境的正确定义都使医学成为科学的。对治疗环境的考虑导致了疗效和有效性(或益处)之间的重要区别,并且可以理解的是,传统设计的随机对照试验(安慰剂对照双盲试验)仅限于对药物理论的评估。对治疗效果的评估需要更实际的试验,研究治疗操作,而不是孤立的组成部分,甚至可以比较整个治疗策略。实用的临床试验,在未来,将不仅允许研究“发病机制阻滞剂”。,而且还研究了与宿主形成有关的“健康成因”干预措施。以临床流行病学为基础科学的循证医学新学派(如果不被肤浅地理解为纯粹的文献医学)的关注和研究重点早就被确定为疾病是宿主、疾病和环境的产物。与此同时,关于“安慰剂”和“特定效果”的争论已经过时了。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信