Andrade Chittaranjan
Dept. of Clinical Psychopharmacology and Neurotoxicology, National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences, Bangalore, Karnataka, India.
Indian J Psychol Med. 2025 Jan;47(1):83-85. doi: 10.1177/02537176241297953. Epub 2024 Nov 20.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are a gold standard in evidence-based research. However, RCTs have limitations, among which the most commonly acknowledged is that narrow study selection criteria compromise the external validity of the findings. This article briefly touches upon this and other well-recognized limitations and presents, in greater detail, less commonly acknowledged limitations with examples from contemporary literature. Important among the less commonly acknowledged limitations are biases in RCTs of interventions to which patients cannot be blinded, weaknesses in the design of maintenance therapy RCTs, and, ubiquitously, post-randomization biases. The listed limitations notwithstanding, RCTs are still the best among research designs. What is important is to recognize the imperfections in each RCT so that the findings of the RCT can be better judged.
随机对照试验(RCTs)是循证研究中的黄金标准。然而,随机对照试验存在局限性,其中最普遍认可的是狭窄的研究选择标准会损害研究结果的外部有效性。本文简要提及了这一局限性以及其他公认的局限性,并更详细地介绍了一些较少被认可的局限性,并结合当代文献中的实例进行说明。在较少被认可的局限性中,重要的包括患者无法对其进行盲法的干预性随机对照试验中的偏倚、维持治疗随机对照试验设计中的弱点,以及普遍存在的随机化后偏倚。尽管存在上述所列的局限性,但随机对照试验仍是研究设计中最佳的。重要的是要认识到每个随机对照试验中的不足之处,以便能更好地评判随机对照试验的结果。