Interpreting a randomized trial report: evidence-based practice for the clinician

The purpose of this article is to present a structured approach to help the reader with the objective interpretation of published randomized clinical trials. This process will promote an organized and critical appraisal of scientific evidence, which we believe to be an essential step prior to the in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inThe journal of maternal-fetal & neonatal medicine Vol. 29; no. 16; p. 2640
Main Authors Vidaeff, Alex C, Saade, George R, Belfort, Michael A
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England 01.01.2016
Subjects
Evidence-Based Medicine
Evidence-Based Practice
Humans
Peer Review
Practice Guidelines as Topic
Practice Patterns, Physicians
Publishing
Quality Control
interpreting published reports
scientific evidence
CONSORT statements
Online AccessGet more information

Cover

More Information
Summary:The purpose of this article is to present a structured approach to help the reader with the objective interpretation of published randomized clinical trials. This process will promote an organized and critical appraisal of scientific evidence, which we believe to be an essential step prior to the introduction of published scientific findings into clinical practice. The reason to personally scrutinize and critically assess published reports is that the process of peer review is by no means perfect and methodological flaws can be uncovered, even in articles published in prestigious journals. The article elaborates on the substance of the consolidated standards of reporting trials (CONSORT) statements intended to facilitate the complete reporting of trials and aid in their critical assessment. The structure of the CONSORT guidelines was used as a basis for specific commentary, including cautions for the clinical interpretation, implications and impact of published randomized trial reports.
ISSN:1476-4954
DOI:10.3109/14767058.2015.1095882