临床试验结果在临床实践中的应用。

Developments in ophthalmology Pub Date : 2017-01-01 Epub Date: 2017-04-20 DOI:10.1159/000459707
Marco A Zarbin, Neelakshi Bhagat, Lekha K Mukkamala
{"title":"临床试验结果在临床实践中的应用。","authors":"Marco A Zarbin,&nbsp;Neelakshi Bhagat,&nbsp;Lekha K Mukkamala","doi":"10.1159/000459707","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Two critical questions one must answer as one applies the results of a clinical trial to clinical practice are: (1) Regardless of whether the trial result is likely to be replicated or reproduced in a second large-scale trial, are the results likely to be reproduced in one's practice? (2) Regardless of whether the experimental treatment was better than the alternative on average for a population of patients, are the results clinically important for a given patient in one's practice? To determine if a study result is likely to be reproduced in one's clinical practice, it may be helpful to answer 5 questions: (1) Have steps been taken to minimize bias? (2) Is the result likely due to the treatment? (3) Is the result unlikely due to chance? (4) Is the study population representative of one's patients? (5) Is the totality of evidence consistent? If the answer to all 5 questions is \"yes,\" then we posit that the trial result is likely to be reproduced in one's practice. If not, the likelihood of reproducibility is low. If the answer is yes to all questions except the last, then reproducibility in one's practice is not clear and depends on the strength of the prior versus the current evidence. If the prior evidence is strong, such as multiple pivotal randomized clinical trials, and if the current trial result is not consistent with the previous studies, then the current result may not be reproduced in one's practice. To determine if a study result is clinically important, a 3-step approach is suggested. Step 1. Decide, a priori, what a clinically meaningful difference between 2 treatments would be. This choice defines regions of beneficial, harmful, and trivial outcomes. Step 2. Identify the confidence intervals (CIs). Determine whether the 95% CI mostly includes the range of clinically beneficial outcomes and lies outside the range of clinically harmful outcomes. If these conditions are met, the result is probably clinically important, but the result may or may not be statistically significant. Put the CIs and the regions of benefit/harm together to make a decision about clinically important effects. Step 3. Assess the proportion of eyes with clinically meaningful changes in vision. The proportion of \"responders\" among patients receiving a given treatment reflects the likelihood of one's patient having a clinically meaningful response to the treatment. In summary, not all statistically significant results are reproduced, even those of carefully designed clinical trials. Determining if a study result is likely to be reproduced in one's practice is even more problematic. The 5-question test may help in this regard. The 5-question test attempts to assess whether steps have been taken to: minimize bias; avoid confounding; ensure adequate statistical power to support precision in the estimates of population parameters; insure external validity of the trial result; and determine whether there is a convergence of evidence consistent with the trial's major findings. To determine if a statistically significant result is likely to be clinically important, a 3-step approach may be useful, focusing on CIs and the proportion of eyes with clinically meaningful changes in vision. Application of clinical trial results to clinical practice requires critical analysis of the extant literature and good clinical judgment.</p>","PeriodicalId":77107,"journal":{"name":"Developments in ophthalmology","volume":"60 ","pages":"175-189"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000459707","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Application of Clinical Trial Results to Clinical Practice.\",\"authors\":\"Marco A Zarbin,&nbsp;Neelakshi Bhagat,&nbsp;Lekha K Mukkamala\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000459707\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Two critical questions one must answer as one applies the results of a clinical trial to clinical practice are: (1) Regardless of whether the trial result is likely to be replicated or reproduced in a second large-scale trial, are the results likely to be reproduced in one's practice? (2) Regardless of whether the experimental treatment was better than the alternative on average for a population of patients, are the results clinically important for a given patient in one's practice? To determine if a study result is likely to be reproduced in one's clinical practice, it may be helpful to answer 5 questions: (1) Have steps been taken to minimize bias? (2) Is the result likely due to the treatment? (3) Is the result unlikely due to chance? (4) Is the study population representative of one's patients? (5) Is the totality of evidence consistent? If the answer to all 5 questions is \\\"yes,\\\" then we posit that the trial result is likely to be reproduced in one's practice. If not, the likelihood of reproducibility is low. If the answer is yes to all questions except the last, then reproducibility in one's practice is not clear and depends on the strength of the prior versus the current evidence. If the prior evidence is strong, such as multiple pivotal randomized clinical trials, and if the current trial result is not consistent with the previous studies, then the current result may not be reproduced in one's practice. To determine if a study result is clinically important, a 3-step approach is suggested. Step 1. Decide, a priori, what a clinically meaningful difference between 2 treatments would be. This choice defines regions of beneficial, harmful, and trivial outcomes. Step 2. Identify the confidence intervals (CIs). Determine whether the 95% CI mostly includes the range of clinically beneficial outcomes and lies outside the range of clinically harmful outcomes. If these conditions are met, the result is probably clinically important, but the result may or may not be statistically significant. Put the CIs and the regions of benefit/harm together to make a decision about clinically important effects. Step 3. Assess the proportion of eyes with clinically meaningful changes in vision. The proportion of \\\"responders\\\" among patients receiving a given treatment reflects the likelihood of one's patient having a clinically meaningful response to the treatment. In summary, not all statistically significant results are reproduced, even those of carefully designed clinical trials. Determining if a study result is likely to be reproduced in one's practice is even more problematic. The 5-question test may help in this regard. The 5-question test attempts to assess whether steps have been taken to: minimize bias; avoid confounding; ensure adequate statistical power to support precision in the estimates of population parameters; insure external validity of the trial result; and determine whether there is a convergence of evidence consistent with the trial's major findings. To determine if a statistically significant result is likely to be clinically important, a 3-step approach may be useful, focusing on CIs and the proportion of eyes with clinically meaningful changes in vision. Application of clinical trial results to clinical practice requires critical analysis of the extant literature and good clinical judgment.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77107,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Developments in ophthalmology\",\"volume\":\"60 \",\"pages\":\"175-189\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1159/000459707\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Developments in ophthalmology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000459707\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2017/4/20 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developments in ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000459707","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2017/4/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

在将临床试验结果应用于临床实践时,必须回答两个关键问题:(1)无论试验结果是否可能在第二次大规模试验中被复制或再现,结果是否可能在一个人的实践中被复制?(2)不管实验治疗是否对一群患者的平均效果好于替代治疗,在一个人的实践中,实验结果对一个给定的患者具有临床重要性吗?要确定一项研究结果是否有可能在临床实践中被复制,回答5个问题可能会有所帮助:(1)是否采取措施将偏倚最小化?(2)这个结果可能是由于治疗引起的吗?(3)结果不可能是偶然的吗?(4)研究人群是否能代表患者?(5)证据的整体是否一致?如果对所有5个问题的回答都是“是”,那么我们假定试验结果很可能在一个人的实践中重现。如果没有,可重复性的可能性就很低。如果除了最后一个问题以外,所有问题的答案都是肯定的,那么一个人的实践的可重复性就不清楚了,这取决于先前的证据与当前证据的强度。如果先前的证据是强有力的,例如多个关键随机临床试验,如果当前的试验结果与先前的研究不一致,那么当前的结果可能无法在实践中复制。为了确定研究结果是否具有临床重要性,建议采用三步法。步骤1。先验地判断两种治疗之间的临床意义差异是什么。这种选择定义了有益、有害和微不足道的结果区域。步骤2。确定置信区间(ci)。确定95% CI是否主要包括临床有益结果的范围,而不在临床有害结果的范围内。如果满足这些条件,结果可能具有临床意义,但结果可能具有统计学意义,也可能不具有统计学意义。将ci和益处/危害区域放在一起,以决定临床重要作用。步骤3。评估有临床意义的视力改变的眼睛比例。在接受特定治疗的患者中,“应答者”的比例反映了患者对治疗产生临床有意义反应的可能性。总而言之,并非所有具有统计学意义的结果都可以重现,即使是那些精心设计的临床试验。确定一项研究结果是否有可能在一个人的实践中重现是一个更大的问题。在这方面,5题测试可能会有所帮助。5个问题的测试试图评估是否采取了以下措施:最大限度地减少偏见;避免混淆;确保有足够的统计能力来支持人口参数估计的准确性;确保试验结果的外部有效性;并确定是否存在与试验主要发现相一致的证据集合。为了确定统计上显著的结果是否可能具有临床重要性,三步法可能是有用的,重点关注CIs和具有临床意义的视力变化的眼睛比例。将临床试验结果应用于临床实践需要对现有文献进行批判性分析和良好的临床判断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Application of Clinical Trial Results to Clinical Practice.

Two critical questions one must answer as one applies the results of a clinical trial to clinical practice are: (1) Regardless of whether the trial result is likely to be replicated or reproduced in a second large-scale trial, are the results likely to be reproduced in one's practice? (2) Regardless of whether the experimental treatment was better than the alternative on average for a population of patients, are the results clinically important for a given patient in one's practice? To determine if a study result is likely to be reproduced in one's clinical practice, it may be helpful to answer 5 questions: (1) Have steps been taken to minimize bias? (2) Is the result likely due to the treatment? (3) Is the result unlikely due to chance? (4) Is the study population representative of one's patients? (5) Is the totality of evidence consistent? If the answer to all 5 questions is "yes," then we posit that the trial result is likely to be reproduced in one's practice. If not, the likelihood of reproducibility is low. If the answer is yes to all questions except the last, then reproducibility in one's practice is not clear and depends on the strength of the prior versus the current evidence. If the prior evidence is strong, such as multiple pivotal randomized clinical trials, and if the current trial result is not consistent with the previous studies, then the current result may not be reproduced in one's practice. To determine if a study result is clinically important, a 3-step approach is suggested. Step 1. Decide, a priori, what a clinically meaningful difference between 2 treatments would be. This choice defines regions of beneficial, harmful, and trivial outcomes. Step 2. Identify the confidence intervals (CIs). Determine whether the 95% CI mostly includes the range of clinically beneficial outcomes and lies outside the range of clinically harmful outcomes. If these conditions are met, the result is probably clinically important, but the result may or may not be statistically significant. Put the CIs and the regions of benefit/harm together to make a decision about clinically important effects. Step 3. Assess the proportion of eyes with clinically meaningful changes in vision. The proportion of "responders" among patients receiving a given treatment reflects the likelihood of one's patient having a clinically meaningful response to the treatment. In summary, not all statistically significant results are reproduced, even those of carefully designed clinical trials. Determining if a study result is likely to be reproduced in one's practice is even more problematic. The 5-question test may help in this regard. The 5-question test attempts to assess whether steps have been taken to: minimize bias; avoid confounding; ensure adequate statistical power to support precision in the estimates of population parameters; insure external validity of the trial result; and determine whether there is a convergence of evidence consistent with the trial's major findings. To determine if a statistically significant result is likely to be clinically important, a 3-step approach may be useful, focusing on CIs and the proportion of eyes with clinically meaningful changes in vision. Application of clinical trial results to clinical practice requires critical analysis of the extant literature and good clinical judgment.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信