This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Online References  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (30)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA

Mike Clarke, DPhil; Phil Alderson, MBChB; Iain Chalmers, DSc

JAMA. 2002;287:2799-2801.

Context  Reliable interpretation of the results of a controlled trial entails setting its results in the context of similar research. A previous study showed that most reports of controlled trials published in 5 general medical journals in May 1997 were deficient in this respect. We assessed the extent to which reports of controlled trials published in the same 5 journals discussed new results in light of the totality of evidence from other controlled trials.

Methods  Assessment of the discussion sections in all 33 reports of randomized trials published during May 2001 in Annals of Internal Medicine, BMJ, JAMA, The Lancet, and The New England Journal of Medicine.

Results  Three reports appeared to have been the first published trials to address the questions studied. In none of the remaining 30 reports were the results of the new trial discussed in the context of an updated systematic review of other trials. Although reference was made to relevant systematic reviews in 3 of these 30 reports, there was no integration, quantitative or qualitative, of the results of the new trials in an update of these reviews. In the remaining 27 reports, there was no evidence that any systematic attempt had been made to set the new results in the context of previous trials.

Conclusions  Between 1997 and 2001, there was no evidence of progress in the proportion of reports of trials published in general medical journals that discussed the new results within the context of, or with reference to, up-to-date systematic reviews of relevant evidence from other controlled trials.

Author Affiliations: UK Cochrane Centre, Oxford, England.

RELATED ARTICLE

June 5, 2002
JAMA. 2002;287(21):2875-2876.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Evaluation of networks of randomized trials
Salanti et al.
Stat Methods Med Res 2008;17:279-301.
ABSTRACT  

Why promote the findings of single research studies?
Wilson et al.
BMJ 2008;336:722-722.
FULL TEXT  

Reports of clinical trials should begin and end with up-to-date systematic reviews of other relevant evidence: a status report
Clarke et al.
JRSM 2007;100:187-190.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Reporting of randomized controlled trials in Hodgkin lymphoma in biomedical journals.
Kober et al.
JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:620-625.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Relative Citation Impact of Various Study Designs in the Health Sciences
Patsopoulos et al.
JAMA 2005;293:2362-2366.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The paths from research to improved health outcomes
Glasziou and Haynes
Evid. Based Nurs. 2005;8:36-38.
FULL TEXT  

The paths from research to improved health outcomes
Glasziou and Haynes
Evid. Based Med. 2005;10:4-7.
FULL TEXT  

Better Reporting of Harms in Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement
Ioannidis et al.
ANN INTERN MED 2004;141:781-788.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Users' guide to detecting misleading claims in clinical research reports
Montori et al.
BMJ 2004;329:1093-1096.
FULL TEXT  

Prior convictions: bayesian approaches to the analysis and interpretation of clinical megatrials
Diamond and Kaul
J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:1929-1939.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The James Lind Initiative
Chalmers
JRSM 2003;96:575-576.
FULL TEXT  

Trying to do more Good than Harm in Policy and Practice: The Role of Rigorous, Transparent, Up-to-Date Evaluations
Chalmers
The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2003;589:22-40.
ABSTRACT  

How many Cochrane reviews are needed to cover existing evidence on the effects of healthcare interventions?
Mallett and Clarke
Evid. Based Med. 2003;8:100-101.
FULL TEXT  

The Need for and Characteristics of Randomized, Phase III Trials to Evaluate Symptom Management in Patients With Cancer
Varricchio and Sloan
JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 2002;94:1184-1185.
FULL TEXT  

Poor-Quality Medical Research: What Can Journals Do?
Altman
JAMA 2002;287:2765-2767.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT