 |
|
A Word From Our Moderator
|
|
| Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings. |
|
|
|
To the Editor: In their Commentary, Dr Kraemer and colleagues1 draw attention to the importance of moderators of treatment outcomes, the often unsatisfactory way these are dealt with (if at all) in randomized clinical trials (RCTs), and the potentially serious consequences of this neglect on patient care. They propose that every RCT should include a search for putative moderators of treatment outcome. Although acknowledging that positive results of such analyses rarely provide proof of the existence of these moderators, they stress that the importance resides in the hypotheses that the analyses generate. These hypotheses can then be tested in subsequent adequately powered and populated RCTs. However, it may take years to design, acquire adequate funding for, and execute such an RCT.
As an alternative, conducting N-of-1 trials2 can be valuable to further investigate information on moderators of treatment outcome. As a hypothetical example, suppose an RCT had been conducted to . . . [Full Text of this Article]
Japp Deinum, MD, PhD
j.deinum@aig.umcn.nl
Gert Jan van der Wilt, PhD
University Medical Center St Radboud
Nijmegen, the Netherlands
RELATED LETTERS
A Word From Our Moderator
Ian Shrier
JAMA. 2007;297(2):156-157.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Word From Our Moderator—Reply
Helena C. Kraemer, Ellen Frank, and David J. Kupfer
JAMA. 2007;297(2):157.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
RELATED ARTICLE
Moderators of Treatment Outcomes: Clinical, Research, and Policy Importance
Helena C. Kraemer, Ellen Frank, and David J. Kupfer
JAMA. 2006;296(10):1286-1289.
EXTRACT
| FULL TEXT
|
