Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice

There is a lack of high-quality evidence underpinning many contemporary clinical practice guidelines embedded in the healthcare systems, leading to treatment uncertainty and practice variation in most medical disciplines. Comparative effectiveness trials (CETs) represent a diverse range of research...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Current controlled trials in cardiovascular medicine 2021-09, Vol.22 (1), p.620-620, Article 620
Hauptverfasser: Briffa, Tom, Symons, Tanya, Zeps, Nikolajs, Straiton, Nicola, Tarnow-Mordi, William Odita, Simes, John, Harris, Ian A, Cruz, Melinda, Webb, Steven A, Litton, Edward, Nichol, Alistair, Williams, Christopher M
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:There is a lack of high-quality evidence underpinning many contemporary clinical practice guidelines embedded in the healthcare systems, leading to treatment uncertainty and practice variation in most medical disciplines. Comparative effectiveness trials (CETs) represent a diverse range of research that focuses on optimising health outcomes by comparing currently approved interventions to generate high-quality evidence to inform decision makers. Yet, despite their ability to produce real-world evidence that addresses the key priorities of patients and health systems, many implementation challenges exist within the healthcare environment. This manuscript aims to highlight common barriers to conducting CETs and describes potential solutions to normalise their conduct as part of a learning healthcare system.
ISSN:1745-6215
1745-6215
DOI:10.1186/s13063-021-05566-1