4.2 Review

Are You Tilting at Windmills or Undertaking a Valid Clinical Trial?

Journal

YONSEI MEDICAL JOURNAL
Volume 52, Issue 5, Pages 701-716

Publisher

YONSEI UNIV COLL MEDICINE
DOI: 10.3349/ymj.2011.52.5.701

Keywords

Human; research; protocol; guidelines; translation; neurology

Funding

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
  2. Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI)
  3. Rick Hansen Institute (RHI)
  4. Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research (MSFHR)
  5. International Collaboration for Cures of spinal cord Paralysis (ICCP)
  6. Spinal Cord Outcomes Partnership Endeavor (SCOPE)
  7. Peter Wall Institute for Advanced Studies (PWIAS)
  8. John and Penny Ryan BC Leadership Chair

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this review, several aspects surrounding the choice of a therapeutic intervention and the conduct of clinical trials are discussed. Some of the background for why human studies have evolved to their current state is also included. Specifically, the following questions have been addressed: I) What criteria should be used to determine whether a scientific discovery or invention is worthy of translation to human application? 2) What recent scientific advance warrants a deeper understanding of clinical trials by everyone? 3) What are the different types and phases of a clinical trial? 4) What characteristics of a human disorder should be noted, tracked, or stratified for a clinical trial and what inclusion /exclusion criteria are important to enrolling appropriate trial subjects? 5) What are the different study designs that can be used in a clinical trial program? 6) What confounding factors can alter the accurate interpretation of clinical trial outcomes? 7) What are the success rates of clinical trials and what can we learn from previous clinical trials? 8) What are the essential principles for the conduct of valid clinical trials?

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available