Skip to main content

Measurements – They'ever Exact

  • Chapter
It's Great! Oops, No It Isn't
  • 1640 Accesses

Measurements encompasses more than simple quantitative information such as height, weight, volume or frequency. In clinical trials, measurements refer to all the data collected on the subjects including efficacy and safety measures. It's not always clear what measurement should be used and in researching conditions such as schizophrenia, heart attack prevention, cancer, and anorexia nervosa there is a wide assortment of choices. The distinction between objectives versus subjective measurements is drawn and collecting safety data, vitally important in all clinical trials, involves both objective laboratory rests and subjective patient reports. Researchers must also decide when a measurement will be taken and whether to use surrogate and/or composite measurements. Due to the multiplicity of measurement decisions, two research teams may design very different trials and, as a result, obtain very different results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Chapter 8 — Measurements

Cited References

  • Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST) II Investigators. Effect of the antiarrhythmic agent moricizine on survival after myocardial infarction. New Engl J Med 1992:327;227–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freemantle N, Calvert M, Wood J, et al. Composite outcomes in randomized trials: greater precision but with greater uncertainty? JAMA 2003:289;2554–2559.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gotzsche P. Methodology and overt and hidden bias in reports of 196 double blind trials double-blind trials of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in rheumatoid arthritis. Control Clin Trials 1989:10;31–56.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • McIntosh V, Jordan J, Carter F, et al. Three psychotherapies for anorexia nervosa: a randomized, controlled trial. Am J Psychiat 2005:162;741–747.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rothman K. Significance questing. Ann Intern Med 1986:105;445–447.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell P. External validity of randomised controlled trials: “To whom do the results of this trial apply?” Lancet 2005:365;82–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Thornley B, Adams C. Content and quality of 2000 controlled trials in schizophrenia over 50 years. Br Med J 1998:317;1181–1184.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

General References

  • Editorial. Measurement imprecision. Lancet 1992:339;587–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming T, Demets D. Surrogate end points in clinical trials: are we being misled? Ann Intern Med 1996:125;605–613.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fogg L, Gross D. Threats to validity in randomized clinical trials. Res Nurs Health 2000:23;79–87.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Furberg C. To whom do the research findings apply? Heart 2002:87;570–574.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Guyatt G, Naylor C, Juniper E, et al. How to use articles about health-related quality of life. JAMA 1997:277;1232–1237.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Harris G. New drug points up problems in developing cancer cures. New York Times Dec 21, 2005:A37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montori V, Permanyer-Miralda G, Gonzalez I, et al. Validity of composite end points in clinical trials. Br Med J 2005:330;594–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon S. Statistical evidence in medical trials. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

    Google Scholar 

  • Welsford M, Morrison L. Defining the outcome measures for out-of-hospital trials in acute pulmonary edema. Acad Emerg Med 2002:9;983–988.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2009 Springer Science + Business Media B.V

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

(2009). Measurements – They'ever Exact. In: It's Great! Oops, No It Isn't. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8907-7_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics