How and why study designs affect the nature and validity of study results: appearance versus true knowledge. Part II.
Abstract
Patients often do not respond optimally to the first medication tried. Hence, switching among classes of medications-and even within a class-for a given indication is common in clinical practice. Such switches are often based on clinical judgment or experience, but it is preferable to base such decisions on valid empirical data when available. The first part of this two-part series described findings from early sequential treatment trials of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) to illustrate how data derived from suboptimally designed trials pro-duce only the appearance of knowledge rather than reliable knowledge. Although these early trials suggested that 50% to 60% of patients who had not benefited from one SSRI could benefit when switched to a second SSRI, this conclusion is not supported by pharmacologic data or recent research findings. Part I of this series reviewed differences between treatment in clinical trials and routine practice settings that might account for those discrepancies. This second part of the series describes five different types of study designs, ranging from the least to the most rigorous, to help clinicians decide how much credence to give to results produced by these different types of studies and thus how to better recognize when studies are providing the appearance rather than the substance of knowledge. (Journal of Psychiatric Practice 2009;15:402-407).
Read the paper
Related studies
- Comparative effectiveness of GLP-1 receptor agonists on glycaemic control, body weight, and lipid profile for type 2 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis
- Adverse effects of cyclooxygenase 2 inhibitors on renal and arrhythmia events: meta-analysis of randomized trials
- Benefits and harms of drug treatment for type 2 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
- Comparative effectiveness and safety of statins as a class and of specific statins for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: A systematic review, meta‐analysis, and network meta‐analysis of randomized trials with 94,283 participants
- Screen time increases overweight and obesity risk among adolescents: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis
- Exposure to WHO AWaRe antibiotics and isolation of multi-drug resistant bacteria: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.