Kornman K S, Newman M G, Holtzman S, Matheson J E
Department of Periodontics, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.
J Periodontol. 1992 Dec;63(12 Suppl):1064-71. doi: 10.1902/jop.1992.63.12s.1064.
In the early 1950s the randomized control trial (RCT) was introduced and became widely accepted as the definitive proof of efficacy of a specific medical treatment. In fact, the acceptance and application of this methodology were instrumental in converting medicine from an unpredictable art to a science. At present no other methodologies exist that allow the evaluation of therapeutic efficacy with confidence comparable to that achieved with randomized controlled trials. In recent years researchers have applied new experimental designs and data analysis techniques to clinical trials conducted in a field trial environment to facilitate the understanding of proper use of new therapeutic agents and procedures. Since many of the new methodologies are still evolving or have only recently been introduced, this review considers some of the major trends and developments, as well as experiences of the authors, in field trial methodology. This manuscript addresses the following questions: 1) are there current clinical trial needs that are not met by RCT? 2) If so, what considerations are necessary for new approaches to have scientific usefulness? and 3) What are the strengths and weaknesses of the field trial's setting relative to an institutional environment?
20世纪50年代初,随机对照试验(RCT)被引入并被广泛接受为特定医学治疗疗效的确凿证据。事实上,这种方法的接受和应用有助于将医学从一门不可预测的艺术转变为一门科学。目前,不存在其他方法能够像随机对照试验那样有信心地评估治疗效果。近年来,研究人员将新的实验设计和数据分析技术应用于在现场试验环境中进行的临床试验,以促进对新治疗药物和程序正确使用的理解。由于许多新方法仍在不断发展或最近才被引入,本综述考虑了现场试验方法中的一些主要趋势和发展,以及作者的经验。本手稿解决以下问题:1)随机对照试验是否无法满足当前的临床试验需求?2)如果是这样,新方法要具有科学实用性需要考虑哪些因素?3)相对于机构环境,现场试验环境的优势和劣势是什么?