© 2002 by Heart
EDITORIAL
Observational research in the evidence based environment: eclipsed by the randomised controlled trial?
Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Dr Rod H Stables, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Prescot Street, Liverpool L7 8XP, UK;
r.stables@btinternet.com
Observational research plays an important role in hypothesis generation, establishing questions for future randomised controlled trials and defining the clinical conditions under which they will be addressed.
Keywords: quality of life; randomised controlled trial; research methodology
Abbreviations: ARTS, arterial revascularisation therapy study; CABG, coronary artery bypass graft; NICE, National Institute of Clinical Evidence; PTCA, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty; RCT, randomised controlled trial; SoS, stent or surgery
Patient based measures of outcome are assuming an increasing importance in the evaluation of therapeutic intervention. A classic, theoretical example of the importance of this approach involves the reporting of trials evaluating surgical procedures for benign prostatic obstruction. High quality studies might report significant improvements in appropriate outcome measures, such as the urinary flow rate or frequency of nocturia, and establish an apparent superiority over conservative treatment. When, however, patient satisfaction is considered, a side effect of erectile impotence in the surgical group may reverse this position.
A number of instruments have been developed for the quantitative assessment of what is now often referred to as "quality of life". These may be generic, examining several aspects or dimensions of physical function and perceived well being. Others are disease specific with, for example, the Seattle Angina Questionnaire and the Cardiac Health Profile representing leading instruments in the assessment of angina pectoris.1
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Hannan, E. L.
(2008). Randomized Clinical Trials and Observational Studies: Guidelines for Assessing Respective Strengths and Limitations. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv
1: 211-217
[Abstract] [Full Text]
- Full Text
- Full Text (PDF)
- Submit a response
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me when eLetters are posted
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- Citation Map
Services
- Email this link to a friend
- Similar articles in this journal
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Add article to my folders
- Download to citation manager
- Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Topic Collections
-
Epidemiology
-
Interventional cardiology
-
Percutaneous intervention
-
Drugs: cardiovascular system
-
Stable coronary heart disease
Bookmark with
Register for free content
The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.
Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.
