Carter Bernie
Department of Nursing, University of Central Lancashire, Preston PR1 2HE, UK.
Complement Ther Nurs Midwifery. 2003 Aug;9(3):133-9. doi: 10.1016/S1353-6117(03)00042-8.
The increasing drive to adopt evidence-based practice within the mainstream health service creates a sense of urgency for high quality, rigorous research to support CAM. The RCT is seen as the gold standard for allopathic research. However, the tenets of the RCT cannot simply be just picked up and applied to CAM research. Critics of the RCT propose that it fractures and fragments the essence of many complementary therapies. Challenges including standardisation, blinding, randomisation, practitioner influence, placebos, and controls are explored and some possible solutions are presented. CAM researchers need to be creative so that they capture some of the intangibles that currently slip through the reductionist net of the RCT.
主流医疗服务机构越来越倾向于采用循证医学实践，这使得开展高质量、严谨的研究以支持补充替代医学（CAM）变得刻不容缓。随机对照试验（RCT）被视为对抗疗法研究的金标准。然而，RCT的原则不能简单地照搬应用于CAM研究。RCT的批评者认为，它破坏并割裂了许多补充疗法的本质。文中探讨了包括标准化、盲法、随机化、从业者影响、安慰剂和对照等方面的挑战，并提出了一些可能的解决方案。CAM研究人员需要发挥创造力，以便捕捉目前在RCT的还原论框架中遗漏的一些无形因素。
