Journal of comparative effectiveness research
-
Evaluation of: Mol F, van Mello NM, Strandell A et al. Salpingotomy versus salpingectomy in women with tubal pregnancy (ESEP study): an open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 383(9927), 1483-1439 (2014). ⋯ To date, there is a wealth of data establishing laparoscopic treatment as the 'gold standard'; however, paradoxically, the evidence behind choosing the two main treatment methods of salpingotomy and salpingectomy, especially with regards to future fertility potential, remain unclear. This article is a summary of a randomized controlled trial of salpingotomy versus salpingectomy in patients with an apparent contralateral healthy tube and the impact on future fertility. It attempts to answer the clinical question whether preservation of tube by salpingotomy increases the futures chances of natural conception as opposed to salpingectomy.
-
Editorial Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study
Accelerated versus standard care in hip fracture patients: does speed save lives?
-
The intense competition that accompanied the growth of internet-based companies ushered in the era of 'big data' characterized by major innovations in processing of very large amounts of data and the application of advanced analytics including data mining and machine learning. Healthcare is on the cusp of its own era of big data, catalyzed by the changing regulatory and competitive environments, fueled by growing adoption of electronic health records, as well as efforts to integrate medical claims, electronic health records and other novel data sources. ⋯ For life science companies, this will impact the entire pharmaceutical value chain from early research to postcommercialization support. More generally, this will revolutionize comparative effectiveness research.
-
Many comparative effectiveness research and patient-centered outcomes research studies will need to be observational for one or both of two reasons: first, randomized trials are expensive and time-consuming; and second, only observational studies can answer some research questions. It is generally recognized that there is a need to increase the scientific validity and efficiency of observational studies. ⋯ Bayesian data analysis is being introduced into outcomes studies that we are conducting. Our purpose here is to describe our view of some of the advantages of Bayesian methods for observational studies and to illustrate both realized and potential advantages by describing studies we are conducting in which various Bayesian methods have been or could be implemented.