Bmc Med
-
Observational studies are essential for assessing safety. The aims of this study were to evaluate whether results of observational studies evaluating an intervention with safety outcome(s) registered at ClinicalTrials.gov were published and, if not, whether they were available through posting on ClinicalTrials.gov or the sponsor website. ⋯ Only 39% of observational studies evaluating an intervention with safety outcome(s) registered at ClinicalTrials.gov had their results published at least 30 months after study completion. The registration of these observational studies allowed searching other sources (results posted at ClinicalTrials.gov and sponsor website) and obtaining results for half of unpublished studies and 93% of the total target number of participants.
-
Thyroid nodules are common, and most are benign. Given the risk of false-negative cytology (i.e. malignancy), follow-up is recommended after 1-2 years, though this recommendation is based solely on expert opinion. Sonographic appearance may assist with planning, but is limited by large inter-observer variability. We therefore compared the safety and efficacy of long- versus short-interval follow-up after a benign initial aspiration, regardless of sonographic appearance. ⋯ While expert opinion currently recommends repeat evaluation of a cytologically benign nodule at 1-2 years, these are the first data to demonstrate that this interval can be safely extended to 3 years without increased mortality or patient harm. Nodule growth can be expected, though detection of malignancies is unchanged. While replication of these data in large prospective multicenter studies is needed, this extension in follow-up interval would reduce unnecessary visits and medical interventions for millions of affected patients worldwide, leading to healthcare savings. Please see related commentary article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0559-9 and research article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0419-z .
-
Comment
Clinical utility of RAS mutations in thyroid cancer: a blurred picture now emerging clearer.
RAS mutations play an important role in thyroid tumorigenesis. Considerable effort has been made in the last decade to apply RAS mutations as molecular markers to the clinical management of thyroid nodules and thyroid cancer. ⋯ This progress in understanding RAS mutations in thyroid cancer is showing a major impact on molecular-based practice in the management of thyroid cancer. Please see related research articles: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0554-1 and http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12916-015-0419-z.
-
Multiple treatments are frequently available for a given condition, and clinicians and patients need a comprehensive, up-to-date synthesis of evidence for all competing treatments. We aimed to quantify the waste of research related to the failure of systematic reviews to provide a complete and up-to-date evidence synthesis over time. ⋯ We illustrate how systematic reviews of a given condition provide a fragmented, out-of-date panorama of the evidence for all treatments. This waste of research might be reduced by the development of live cumulative network meta-analyses.
-
Pragmatic randomized trials aim to examine the effects of interventions in the full spectrum of patients seen by clinicians who receive routine care. Such trials should be employed in parallel with efforts to implement many interventions which appear promising but where evidence of effectiveness is limited. We illustrate this need taking the case of essential interventions to reduce inpatient neonatal mortality in low and middle income countries (LMIC) but suggest the arguments are applicable in most clinical areas. ⋯ A set of basic interventions have been defined, based on available evidence, that could substantially reduce early neonatal deaths if successfully implemented at scale within district and sub-district hospitals in LMIC. However, we illustrate that there remain many gaps in the evidence available to guide delivery of many inpatient neonatal interventions, that existing evidence is often from high income settings and that it frequently indicates uncertainty in the magnitude or even direction of estimates of effect. Furthermore generalizing results to LMIC where conditions include very high patient staff ratios, absence of even basic technologies, and a reliance on largely empiric management is problematic. Where there is such uncertainty over the effectiveness of interventions in different contexts or in the broad populations who might receive the intervention in routine care settings pragmatic trials that preserve internal validity while promoting external validity should be increasingly employed. Many interventions are introduced without adequate evidence of their effectiveness in the routine settings to which they are introduced. Global efforts are needed to support pragmatic research to establish the effectiveness in routine care of many interventions intended to reduce mortality or morbidity in LMIC. Such research should be seen as complementary to efforts to optimize implementation.