This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Cardiovascular System  • Statistics and Research Methods  • Randomized Controlled Trial  • Cardiovascular Disease/ Myocardial Infarction  • Alert me on articles by topic  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Mike Mitka

JAMA. 2006;295:611-612.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Sessions at the major heart associations' annual meetings featuring "late-breaking" results from clinical trials are highly anticipated occasions offering clinicians glimpses at important findings that could have practice-changing implications. But at the American Heart Association's (AHA’s) annual meeting in Dallas, the perception, at least among some attendees, was that for an unusually large number of "late-breaking" clinical trials that were given the spotlight, researchers found no benefit from the intervention being studied.

For some, the occasion raised interesting questions: Does the relative dearth of positive findings emerging from a number of current therapeutic trials signal some type of shift for cardiovascular disease research or is it merely an aberration? And, given the history of sponsors failing to publish negative trial results, is this a move to more openness?

Some scientists believe that there is little room for improvement with current treatments for heart disease and that future advances . . . [Full Text of this Article]

NEW RESEARCH STRATEGIES NEEDED?



CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?