In this article, various designs of clinical trials used to obtain new scientific knowledge in the field of clinical medicine are considered from the position of their evidential value in studying the cause‑and‑effect relationship between the influencing factor and result of its potential effect on human health. Basic differences between observational and experimental trials, their limitations due to peculiarities of design of clinical trials are being discussed. A conclusion is made that validity of results of clinical trials should be assessed taking into account the limitations that are typical of various designs. Accuracy of clinical trials depends on many factors that can distort the obtained results as compared with true values. It is noted that observational trials are subject to systematic and accidental errors to a greater extent than experimental ones. It occurs because design characteristics do not allow observational trials to control the mistakes associated with possible incompatibility of comparison groups. They can detect a statistical relation between the phenomena, but only randomized clinical trials can prove that there is a causal relationship. Accuracy of a randomized clinical trial can be increased using systematic reviews and meta‑analysis.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.