- Gavin Andrews, professor (gavina@crufad.unsw.edu.au)
- School of Psychiatry, University of New South Wales at St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia
- Correspondence to: G Andrews, Anxiety Disorders Unit, Darlinghurst, New South Wales, 2010 Australia
- Accepted 30 April 1999
The papers in this section are all based on talks given at a conference last October to mark 50 years of clinical trials, organised by the BMJ and the Medical Research Council
Identifying the efficacy of treatments from the data from randomised controlled trials is the first step in improving the efficiency of medical care. The implementation of clinical practice guidelines on the basis of this evidence, and prioritising of practice on the basis of cost effectiveness studies, are the next steps. Psychiatry seems nervous about trusting itself to this process. It is 50 years since the first randomised controlled trial in medicine, and doctors in other specialties seem sufficiently comfortable with the method to form research practice consortia and to conduct mega-trials 1 2 that are comparatively immune to the methodological and political hazards that can beset small randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses 3 4 Why, then, have mega-trials not begun in psychiatry? There are two important reasons: the types of treatment used, and the nature of the endpoints. Psychological treatments can be effective and, in certain disorders, more effective than drugs.5 It is easy to be certain about the quality of drugs, but psychological treatments, unless manualised for both physician and patient, depend on the fidelity with which practitioners carry out the treatment Next, the 22% of the global burden of disease attributed to mental disorders is made up of 21% from morbidity and only 1% from mortality.6 Measuring morbidity or disability is much more complex than measuring mortality, the usual endpoint in mega-trials of physical disorders
Summary points
There are good randomised controlled trials in psychiatry, but as psychological treatments are difficult to standardise and disability is a difficult endpoint to measure, small randomised controlled trials are susceptible to bias
Psychiatry seems …
Sign in
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record







CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mendeley
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: Bringing Nightingale down to size
Published 29 May 2012
Re: Avoid antimuscarinic drugs in people with dementia
Published 29 May 2012
Re: Strengthening primary health care: Related to the integration of medical training, community service need and health administration
Published 29 May 2012
Re: Strengthening primary health care: Related to the integration of medical training, community service need and health administration
Published 29 May 2012
Health Literacy: Patient involvement and engagement with healthcare
Published 29 May 2012
Most responses
Venous thrombosis in users of non-oral hormonal contraception: follow-up study, Denmark 2001-10 (12 responses)
Published 10 May 2012 - 23:32
The psychiatric oligarchs who medicalise normality (9 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 15:42
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? No (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
Are doctors justified in taking industrial action in defence of their pensions? Yes (8 responses)
Published 8 May 2012 - 12:21
The hardest thing: admitting error (7 responses)
Published 2 May 2012 - 12:27