Reykjavík University, Reykjavík, Iceland.
Eur J Clin Invest. 2017 Sep;47(9):617-621. doi: 10.1111/eci.12782. Epub 2017 Aug 2.
Throughout the quarter century since the advent of evidence-based medicine (EBM), medical research has prioritized 'efficacy' (i.e. internal validity) using randomized controlled trials. EBM has consistently neglected 'effectiveness' and 'cost-effectiveness', identified in the pioneering work of Archie Cochrane as essential for establishing the external (i.e. clinical) validity of health care interventions. Neither Cochrane nor other early pioneers appear to have foreseen the extent to which EBM would be appropriated by the pharmaceutical and medical devices industries, which are responsible for extensive biases in clinical research due to selective reporting, exaggeration of benefits, minimization of risks, and misrepresentation of data. The promise of EBM to effect transformational change in health care will remain unfulfilled until (i) studies of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness are pursued with some of the same fervour that previously succeeded in elevating the status of the randomized controlled trial, and (ii) ways are found to defeat threats to scientific integrity posed by commercial conflicts of interest.
自循证医学(EBM)出现以来的四分之一个世纪里,医学研究一直优先考虑“疗效”(即内部有效性),采用随机对照试验。EBM 一直忽视了“效果”和“成本效益”,阿奇· Cochrane 的开创性工作指出,这对于确定医疗干预措施的外部(即临床)有效性至关重要。Cochrane 和其他早期先驱似乎都没有预见到 EBM 会被制药和医疗器械行业如此广泛地采用,由于选择性报告、夸大收益、最小化风险和数据歪曲,这些行业导致临床研究存在广泛的偏差。只有在以下两个方面取得进展,EBM 才能实现医疗保健的变革性改变:(i)在研究效果和成本效益时,采用与之前成功提升随机对照试验地位的同样热情;(ii)找到克服商业利益冲突对科学完整性构成的威胁的方法。