Comparisons: are they fair and reliable?

Well-informed treatment decisions requires systematic reviews of fair comparisons of treatments; i.e. comparisons designed to minimise the risk of systematic and random errors. Non-systematic summaries can be misleading, and not all comparisons of treatments are fair comparisons.

Browse by Key Concept

Back to Learning Resources home

Filter these resources:

Clear Filters

Know Your Chances

This book has been shown in two randomized trials to improve peoples' understanding of risk in the context of health care choices.

13 | 0 Comments | Evaluated

What are the results?

A Duke Univ. tutorial explaining how to address the questions: How large was the treatment effect? What was the absolute risk reduction?

0 | 0 Comments

Sunn Skepsis

Denne portalen er ment å gi deg som pasient råd om kvalitetskriterier for helseinformasjon og tilgang til forskningsbasert informasjon.

1 | 0 Comments

Dodgy academic PR

Ben Goldacre: 58% of all press releases by academic institutions lacked relevant cautions and caveats about the methods and results reported

0 | 0 Comments

The Systematic Review

This blog explains what a systematic review is, the steps involved in carrying one out, and how the review should be structured.

1 | 0 Comments

Defining Bias

This blog explains what is meant by ‘bias’ in research, focusing particularly on attrition bias and detection bias.

0 | 0 Comments

Data Analysis Methods

A discussion of 2 approaches to data analysis in trials - ‘As Treated’, and ‘Intention-to-Treat’ - and some of the pros and cons of each.

0 | 0 Comments

Defining Risk

This blog defines ‘risk’ in relation to health, and discusses some the difficulties in applying estimates of risk to a given individual.

0 | 0 Comments
CASP logo

P Values – CASP

Statistical significance is usually assessed by appeal to a p-value, a probability, which can take any value between 0 and 1 (certain).

0 | 0 Comments
Book cover

Testing Treatments

Testing Treatments is a book to help the public understand why fair tests of treatments are needed, what they are, and how to use them.

10 | 0 Comments

Goldilocks

Cartoon and blog about how poorly performed systematic reviews and meta-analyses may misrepresent the truth.

0 | 0 Comments

Cherry Picking

Cherry-picking results that only support your own conclusion may mean ignoring important evidence that refutes a treatment claim.

0 | 0 Comments

Forest Plot Trilogy

Synthesising the results of similar but separate fair comparisons (meta-analysis) may help by yielding statistically more reliable estimates

0 | 0 Comments

CEBM – Study Designs

A short article explaining the relative strengths and weaknesses of different types of study design for assessing treatment effects.

0 | 0 Comments
DISCERN logo

DISCERN online

A questionnaire providing a valid and reliable way of assessing the quality of written information on treatment choices.

0 | 0 Comments

Mega-trials

In this 5 min audio resource, Neeraj Bhala discusses systematic reviews and the impact of mega-trials.

0 | 0 Comments

The placebo effect

A video by NHS Choices explaining what the placebo effect is, and describing its role in medical research and the pharmaceutical industry.

0 | 0 Comments
Book cover

Stroke

Another example of unnecessary research, yet again because the results of preceding studies had not been gathered together and analyzed, […]

0 | 2 Comments
Book cover

Psychiatric disorders

Regrettably, research is not always well done or relevant. Take the example of a distressing condition known as tardive dyskinesia. […]

0 | 0 Comments
Book cover

Stroke

Stroke is a leading cause of death and long-term disability. The death rate is between one in six and two […]

0 | 0 Comments
Book cover

In an ideal world

‘In an ideal world, wherever possible, we could be gathering anonymised outcome data and comparing this against medication history, making […]

0 | 0 Comments
Book cover

Marketing-based medicine

‘Internal documents from the pharmaceutical industry suggest that the publicly available evidence base may not accurately represent the underlying data […]

0 | 1 Comment
Book cover

Why did you start?

‘Few principles are more fundamental to the scientific and ethical validity of clinical research than that studies should address questions […]

0 | 0 Comments
Book cover

Is one study ever enough?

The simple answer is ‘hardly ever’. Very seldom will one fair treatment comparison yield sufficiently reliable evidence on which to […]

0 | 1 Comment
Book cover

Comparing like with like

In this sub-section Comparisons are key (this page) Treatments with dramatic effects Treatments with moderate but important effects Comparisons are […]

0 | 2 Comments

No Resources Found

Try clearing your filters or selecting different ones.