- Heather E Elphick, lecturera,
- Anton Tan, specialist registrar in paediatricsb,
- Deborah Ashby, professor of medical statisticsc,
- Rosalind L Smyth, Brough professor of paediatric medicine (r.l.smyth@liv.ac.uk)a
- aUniversity of Liverpool Institute of Child Health, Alder Hey Children's Hospital, Liverpool L12 2AP
- bRespiratory Unit, Alder Hey Children's Hospital
- cWolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine, Barts and The London, Queen Mary's School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of London EC1M 6B9
- Correspondence to: R L Smyth
- Accepted 20 February 2002
Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials provide an evidence base for treatment but too often fail to give adequate information on long term outcomes. Elphick and colleagues discuss the limitations of the systematic review of randomised controlled trials for patients with chronic or lifelong diseases and suggest that long term observational studies have a place in the evaluation of the benefits and risks of treatment
Synthesis of evidence from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials is considered thegold standard when evaluating the effectiveness of treatments, yet systematic reviews do not always place as much emphasis on information about adverse effects or safety issues. 1 2 In people with chronic, or lifelong,diseases long term outcomes are particularly important but are much less likely to be evaluated inrandomised controlled trials. We discuss the results of a recent systematic review of randomised controlled trials of antibiotic therapy in cystic fibrosis, which provided preliminary information about antibiotic resistance but not about other adverse effects. Although the review suggested that this finding should be investigated by a further clinical trial, we discuss why this may be neither the most feasible nor the most efficient study design with which to evaluate long term outcomes in lifelong diseases.
Summary points
A systematic review suggested that there was an increase in antibiotic resistance in patients treated with one compared with two antibiotics
Systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials are often unable to provide adequate information about long term outcomes, which are important for people with chronic diseases
A tension exists in randomised controlled trials between evaluating short term outcomes, which may indicate a need to change practice, and continuing the trial for sufficient time to evaluate long term outcomes
Databases specialising in a particular disease can play a part in capturing information on patients prospectively, provided the clinical questions are …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
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
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: How much of a social media profile can doctors have?
Published 13 February 2012
Re: Diagnosis and management of Raynaud’s phenomenon
Published 13 February 2012
Re: Is it unethical for doctors to encourage healthy adults to donate a kidney to a stranger? No
Published 13 February 2012
Re: Report predicts 20 million AIDS orphans in Africa by 2010
Published 13 February 2012
Re: Darwin’s illness revisited
Published 13 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (7 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (7 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012
How much of a social media profile can doctors have? (6 responses)
Published 23 Jan 2012