Letter

Ethics of clinical trials from bayesian perspective: Randomisation to clinical trials may solve dilemma of treatment choice in prostate cancer

BMJ 2003; 326 doi: 10.1136/bmj.326.7404.1456 (Published 25 June 2003)
Cite this as: BMJ 2003;326:1456.1

Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment. Please log in or subscribe below.

  1. Freddie C Hamdy (F.C.Hamdy@sheffield.ac.uk), professor of urology,
  2. Jenny L Donovan, professor of social medicine,
  3. J Athene Lane, research fellow,
  4. David E Neal, professor of surgical oncology
  1. Academic Urology Unit, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield S10 2JF
  2. Department of Social Medicine, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 2PR
  3. Oncology Centre, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Box 193, Cambridge CB2 2QQ FCH, JLD, and DEN are principal investigators and JAL is coordinator of the ProtecT study.

    EDITOR—Lilford uses the example of the ProtecT study to raise concerns about recruitment to clinical trials, taking quotations out of context from Donovan et al.1 2 Lilford asserts that in this study men are simply told that the best treatment for localised prostate cancer is “uncertain” that they are not given enough information or time to question the recruiter about essential details about treatments and side effects; and that …

    Access to the full text of this article requires a subscription or payment

    Subscribe

    Article access

    Article access for 1 day

    Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*

    The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record

    * Prices do not include VAT

    Rapid responses

    THIS WEEK'S POLL

    BMJ most popular