Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice
Abstract 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...
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2021-09-01
|
Series: | Trials |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05566-1 |
id |
doaj-914c553f19f24c5789c4b960e9e9e523 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-914c553f19f24c5789c4b960e9e9e5232021-09-19T11:44:04ZengBMCTrials1745-62152021-09-012211410.1186/s13063-021-05566-1Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practiceTom Briffa0Tanya Symons1Nikolajs Zeps2Nicola Straiton3William Odita Tarnow-Mordi4John Simes5Ian A. Harris6Melinda Cruz7Steven A. Webb8Edward Litton9Alistair Nichol10Christopher M. Williams11University of Western AustraliaUniversity of SydneyEpworth HealthCareUniversity of SydneyUniversity of SydneyUniversity of SydneyIngham InstituteUniversity of SydneyMonash UniversityFiona Stanley HospitalMonash UniversityUniversity of NewcastleAbstract 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.https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05566-1Comparative effectivenessPragmaticTrialsHigh-quality evidenceClinical careEmbed |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Tom Briffa Tanya Symons Nikolajs Zeps Nicola Straiton William Odita Tarnow-Mordi John Simes Ian A. Harris Melinda Cruz Steven A. Webb Edward Litton Alistair Nichol Christopher M. Williams |
spellingShingle |
Tom Briffa Tanya Symons Nikolajs Zeps Nicola Straiton William Odita Tarnow-Mordi John Simes Ian A. Harris Melinda Cruz Steven A. Webb Edward Litton Alistair Nichol Christopher M. Williams Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice Trials Comparative effectiveness Pragmatic Trials High-quality evidence Clinical care Embed |
author_facet |
Tom Briffa Tanya Symons Nikolajs Zeps Nicola Straiton William Odita Tarnow-Mordi John Simes Ian A. Harris Melinda Cruz Steven A. Webb Edward Litton Alistair Nichol Christopher M. Williams |
author_sort |
Tom Briffa |
title |
Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice |
title_short |
Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice |
title_full |
Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice |
title_fullStr |
Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice |
title_full_unstemmed |
Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice |
title_sort |
normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
Trials |
issn |
1745-6215 |
publishDate |
2021-09-01 |
description |
Abstract 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. |
topic |
Comparative effectiveness Pragmatic Trials High-quality evidence Clinical care Embed |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05566-1 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT tombriffa normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice AT tanyasymons normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice AT nikolajszeps normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice AT nicolastraiton normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice AT williamoditatarnowmordi normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice AT johnsimes normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice AT ianaharris normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice AT melindacruz normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice AT stevenawebb normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice AT edwardlitton normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice AT alistairnichol normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice AT christophermwilliams normalisingcomparativeeffectivenesstrialsasclinicalpractice |
_version_ |
1717375527327629312 |