Reversals of Established Medical Practices

Prasad, Vinay; Cifu, Adam S.; Ioannidis, John P. A.

doi:10.1001/jama.2011.1960

Cited by 176 publications

(129 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

126

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Investigators who pursue a provocative and exciting idea but that is not based on robust data will consume wasted hours for an idea that is ultimately discarded. For ideas that proceed into late stages of clinical evaluation or are even adopted in clinical practice only to be discarded subsequently, 17 the cost can be enormous. Addressing this concern is central to ensuring ongoing confidence of and support from the public.…”

Section: Why Is This Important?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproducibility in Science

Begley

Ioannidis

2015

Circulation Research

869

414

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Medical and scientific advances are predicated on new knowledge that is robust and reliable and that serves as a solid foundation on which further advances can be built. In biomedical research, we are in the midst of a revolution with the generation of new data and scientific publications at a previously unprecedented rate. However, unfortunately, there is compelling evidence that the majority of these discoveries will not stand the test of time. To a large extent, this reproducibility crisis in basic and preclinical research may be as a result of failure to adhere to good scientific practice and the desperation to publish or perish. This is a multifaceted, multistakeholder problem. No single party is solely responsible, and no single solution will suffice. Here we review the reproducibility problems in basic and preclinical biomedical research, highlight some of the complexities, and discuss potential solutions that may help improve research quality and reproducibility. (Circ Res. 2015;116:116-126.

show abstract

Section: Why Is This Important?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproducibility in Science

Begley

Ioannidis

2015

Circulation Research

869

414

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We disagree. the cost to society when ultimately ineffective practices gain widespread use is often an order of magnitude greater than the cost of conducting proper studies upfront (Prasad et al 2012;Prasad and Cifu 2011). Knowing that small gains in survival are real, especially when survival is long, remains best adjudicated by adequately powered trials, and not continued faith in PFs.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Failing to improve overall survival because post-protocol survival is long: fact, myth, excuse or improper study design?

Prasad

Vandross

2014

J Cancer Res Clin Oncol

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, as in clinical practice, many widely recommended treatment methods have unproven value, 17 and some will ultimately be shown to be not only ineffective but harmful. 18 Thus, it should not be assumed that any proposed QI project will be beneficial. The best available evidence should be used in assessing whether it will increase the risk that patients experience were it not conducted.…”

Section: Should This Project Require Review and Oversight From A Qi Cmentioning

confidence: 99%

Randomized n-of-1 Trials: Quality Improvement, Research, or Both?

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The regulatory demarcations between clinical research and quality improvement (QI) are ambiguous and controversial. Some projects that were undertaken as a form of QI were deemed by regulatory agencies to be research and thus to require institutional review board approval. In the era of personalized medicine, some physicians may ask some patients to participate in n-of-1 trials in an effort to personalize and optimize each patient’s medical treatment. Should such activities be considered research, QI, or just excellent personalized medicine? Experts in research, research regulation, and bioethics analyze these issues.

show abstract

Reversals of Established Medical Practices

Cited by 176 publications

References 10 publications

Reproducibility in Science

Reproducibility in Science

Failing to improve overall survival because post-protocol survival is long: fact, myth, excuse or improper study design?

Randomized n-of-1 Trials: Quality Improvement, Research, or Both?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About