Every time that I am teaching evidence-based practice to my students on how to conduct randomised controlled trials, I heard questions like: Why trial quality is not getting better over time?
Don’t get me (or my students) wrong here: trial quality IS improving over time, but in a very (veeeeeeeery) slow pace. Although we can observe a slow improvement over time, it is hard to understand why initiatives like the CONSORT Statement, Cochrane Reviews or PEDro database did not push this improvement further (or faster). There is a lot of data showing that this slow improvement is happening in all fields of health-related research, so there is no winner here. Incidentally, what trial quality is, and how we go about measuring it is another beast all together, and the topic for next week’s post.
My concern is that clinicians don’t have to fully understand research methods in such depth, and dodgy trials make their lives much more complicated. Maybe that is the reason that clinicians sometimes just ignore evidence! I don’t expect a perfect world on this issue, but I think that is unacceptable to see so many biased trials been published these days.
Rob Herbert’s excellent book1 gives us some insights on what would be the reasons that bad trials are still being published:
I was wondering if the ICECREAMers have more ideas on this issue, I would love to hear your opinions on it.
1. Herbert R, Jamtvedt G, Mead J, Hagen KB. Practical Evidence-Based Physiotherapy ed. London: Elsevier’s Health Sciences, 2005.
If you would like to contribute, check out the “About” page and send us an email. We’d love to hear from you!
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 106 other followers
academic misconduct advertising Bec career Cartoon Chris W cochrane collaboration conferences cost doping evidence-based practice experiences experts fun grants hours interpreting research LBP Forum learning Leo C lifestyle Luciola C nerds new skills Nick H PhD placebo presentations profiles publications question of science reporting research methods research translation retraction Sport stats Steve K study quality supervisors Tasha tips for research users videos WCPT work-life workload writing Zoe M