Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
Published 30 October 2008, doi:10.1136/bmj.a2281
Cite this as: BMJ 2008;337:a2281
Nicholas A Christakis, professor of medical sociology, Harvard Medical School, and attending physician, Mt Auburn Hospital, Cambridge, Massachusetts
christak@hcp.med.harvard.edu
To say a drug "works" is only half the story
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
Doctors say that a drug "works" if, in comparison with the control arm of a clinical trial, significantly more people in the treatment arm respond. Unfortunately, this is a naive oversimplification, and it breeds complacency among patients and physicians alike.
Criticisms of this perspective have been lodged before. One is that researchers often pick outcomes that are not patient centred—patients do not care if a tumour shows "shrinkage upon radiological visualisation" but rather whether they are in less pain. Another criticism is that when side effects of drugs are factored in, many patients do not think that a drug works very well at all, even as the doctor or drug company extols its virtues; drop-out rates in the active agent arm of trials often exceed those of the placebo arm, providing evidence of patients distaste for the overall effects of a drug.
But one problem that has received far less
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati What's this?
Read all Rapid Responses