A Commentary on Randomized Clinical Trials: How to Produce Them with a Good Level of Evidence

Overview

Journal Perspect Clin Res

Specialty General Medicine

Date 2016 May 4

PMID 27141473

Citations 12

Authors

Olga Dumont Flecha

Dhelfeson Willya Douglas de Oliveira

Leandro Silva Marques

Patricia Furtado Goncalves

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Randomized clinical trial (RCT) is the gold standard study for the evaluation of health interventions and is considered the second level of evidence for clinical decision making. However, the quality of the evidence produced by these studies is dependent on the methodological rigor employed at every stage of their execution. The purpose of randomization is to create groups that are comparable independent of any known or unknown potential confounding factor. A critical evaluation of the literature reveals that, for many years, RCTs have been developed based on inaccurate methodological criteria, and empirical evidence began to accumulate. Thus, guidelines were developed to assist authors, reviewers, and editors in the task of developing and assessing the methodological consistency of this type of study. The objective of this article is to review key aspects to design a good-quality RCT, supporting the scientific community in the production of reliable evidence and favoring clinical decision making to allow the patient to receive the best health care.

Citing Articles

Evaluation of the roughness, color match, and color stability of two monochromatic composite resins: a randomized controlled laboratory study.

Santana I, de Oliveira S, Botelho K, de Oliveira Rigotti R, Gloria J, Botelho A BMC Oral Health. 2025; 25(1):288.

PMID: 39987049 PMC: 11847386. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-025-05681-4.

Effects of 8 weeks of rhythmic physical activity on gross motor movements in 4-5-year-olds: A randomized controlled trial.

Zhao H, Deng Y, Song G, Zhu H, Sun L, Li H J Exerc Sci Fit. 2024; 22(4):456-462.

PMID: 39502159 PMC: 11535996. DOI: 10.1016/j.jesf.2024.10.001.

Early Mobilization Dose Reporting in Randomized Clinical Trials With Patients Who Were Mechanically Ventilated: A Scoping Review.

Gonzalez-Seguel F, Letelier-Bernal R Phys Ther. 2024; 104(6).

PMID: 38519113 PMC: 11184528. DOI: 10.1093/ptj/pzae048.

Common practices for sociodemographic data reporting in digital mental health intervention research: a scoping review.

Kirvin-Quamme A, Kissinger J, Quinlan L, Montgomery R, Chernenok M, Pirner M BMJ Open. 2024; 14(2):e078029.

PMID: 38346876 PMC: 10862309. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-078029.

Marginal Adaptation of In Vitro Class II Restorations Made Out of Bulk or Conventional Composite Using Single- or Multi-Layered Techniques.

Dietschi D, Askari M, Rossier I, Caseiro L, Krejci I, Leprince J Materials (Basel). 2023; 16(18).

PMID: 37763602 PMC: 10533156. DOI: 10.3390/ma16186325.

References

Hopayian K . The need for caution in interpreting high quality systematic reviews. BMJ. 2001; 323(7314):681-4. PMC: 1121240. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.323.7314.681. View

Schulz K . Randomised trials, human nature, and reporting guidelines. Lancet. 1996; 348(9027):596-8. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)01201-9. View

Cohen J . A power primer. Psychol Bull. 2009; 112(1):155-9. DOI: 10.1037//0033-2909.112.1.155. View

McQuay H, Carroll D, Moore A . Variation in the placebo effect in randomised controlled trials of analgesics: all is as blind as it seems. Pain. 1996; 64(2):331-335. DOI: 10.1016/0304-3959(95)00116-6. View

Porta N, Bonet C, Cobo E . Discordance between reported intention-to-treat and per protocol analyses. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007; 60(7):663-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.09.013. View

Hedden S, Woolson R, Carter R, Palesch Y, Upadhyaya H, Malcolm R . The impact of loss to follow-up on hypothesis tests of the treatment effect for several statistical methods in substance abuse clinical trials. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2008; 37(1):54-63. PMC: 2707817. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsat.2008.09.011. View

Pannucci C, Wilkins E . Identifying and avoiding bias in research. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010; 126(2):619-625. PMC: 2917255. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181de24bc. View

Chene G, Morlat P, Leport C, Hafner R, Dequae L, Charreau I . Intention-to-treat vs. on-treatment analyses of clinical trial data: experience from a study of pyrimethamine in the primary prophylaxis of toxoplasmosis in HIV-infected patients. ANRS 005/ACTG 154 Trial Group. Control Clin Trials. 1998; 19(3):233-48. DOI: 10.1016/s0197-2456(97)00145-1. View

Soares I, Vaz Carneiro A . Intention-to-treat analysis in clinical trials: principles and practical importance. Rev Port Cardiol. 2003; 21(10):1191-8. View

10.

Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz K, Montori V, Gotzsche P, Devereaux P . CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010; 63(8):e1-37. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.004. View

11.

Arya R, Antonisamy B, Kumar S . Sample size estimation in prevalence studies. Indian J Pediatr. 2012; 79(11):1482-8. DOI: 10.1007/s12098-012-0763-3. View

12.

da Silva Filho C, Saconato H, Conterno L, Marques I, Atallah A . [Assessment of clinical trial quality and its impact on meta-analyses]. Rev Saude Publica. 2005; 39(6):865-73. DOI: 10.1590/s0034-89102005000600001. View

13.

Martinez-Ricarte J, Faus-Matoses V, Faus-Llacer V, Flichy-Fernandez A, Mateos-Moreno B . Dentinal sensitivity: concept and methodology for its objective evaluation. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2008; 13(3):E201-6. View

14.

Juni P, Altman D, Egger M . Systematic reviews in health care: Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. BMJ. 2001; 323(7303):42-6. PMC: 1120670. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.323.7303.42. View

15.

Polit D, Gillespie B . Intention-to-treat in randomized controlled trials: recommendations for a total trial strategy. Res Nurs Health. 2010; 33(4):355-68. DOI: 10.1002/nur.20386. View

16.

Altman D, Schulz K, Moher D, Egger M, Davidoff F, Elbourne D . The revised CONSORT statement for reporting randomized trials: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med. 2001; 134(8):663-94. DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-134-8-200104170-00012. View

17.

Altman D, Bland J . Statistics notes. Treatment allocation in controlled trials: why randomise?. BMJ. 1999; 318(7192):1209. PMC: 1115595. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.318.7192.1209. View

18.

Steinberg L, Thissen D . Using effect sizes for research reporting: examples using item response theory to analyze differential item functioning. Psychol Methods. 2006; 11(4):402-15. DOI: 10.1037/1082-989X.11.4.402. View

19.

Montori V, Guyatt G . Intention-to-treat principle. CMAJ. 2002; 165(10):1339-41. PMC: 81628. View

20.

Heritier S, Gebski V, Keech A . Inclusion of patients in clinical trial analysis: the intention-to-treat principle. Med J Aust. 2003; 179(8):438-40. DOI: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2003.tb05627.x. View