The evaluation of trials of medical therapy

A didactic guide to nonsense detection
  • E. W. Kay
  • D. Moore
  • I. M. Graham
Review Article


THE published results of therapeutic trials are the basis on which changes in medical practice are made today. The clinican is, therefore, required to read and critically assess large numbers of these and the magnitude of this task is daunting.

Our aim is to provide a quick but systematic method of identifying papers worthy of further evaluation. We then outline an approach to deciding whether the results of a therapeutic trial are likely to be both true and useful.


Therapeutic Trial Clofibrate Internal Mammary Artery Practolol Coronary Artery Surgery 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Sackett, J. 1981. Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, McMaster University Health Sciences Centre, Hamilton, Ontario. How to read a clinical journal, Pts. I-V. Canadian Med. Ass. J. 124, 555–8, 703-10, 869-72, 985-90, 1156-62.Google Scholar
  2. Wulff, H. R. 1976. Rational diagnosis and treatment. Blackwell Scientific Publications, Oxford.Google Scholar
  3. Preston, T. A. 1977. Coronary artery surgery: a critical review. Raven Press, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Feinstein, A. R. 1967: Clinical Judgement. The Williams and Wilkins Company, Baltimore.Google Scholar
  5. Feinstein, A. R. 1977. Clinical Biostatistics. The CV Bosby Company, Saint Louis.Google Scholar
  6. Hampton, J. R. 1981. Presentation and analysis of the results of clinical trials in cardiovascular disease. Br. Med. J. 282, 1371–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Committee of Principal Investigators. 1980. WHO co-operative trial on primary prevention of ischaemic heart disease using clofibrate to lower serum cholesterol: mortality follow-up. Lancet ii, 379–85.Google Scholar
  8. Graham, I. M. 1982. Drugs and the prevention of death from myocardial infarction. Irish Med. J. 75, No. 8, 291–6.Google Scholar
  9. Colton, T. 1974. Statistics in Medicine. Little, Brown and Company, Boston.Google Scholar
  10. Furburg, C. D. 1978. Possible yields of various forms of intervention after myocardial infarction. In “Acute and long-term management of myocardial ischaemia. Ed. Hjalmarson A. and Wilhelmsen L. Publ. Astra. 309–11.Google Scholar
  11. Anturane Reinfarction Trial Research Group. 1980. Sulphinpyrazone in the prevention of cardiac death after myocardial infarction. The Anturane Reinfarction Trial. New Engl. J. Med. 298, 289–95.Google Scholar
  12. Anturane Reinfarction Trial Research Group. 1978. Sulphinpyrazone in the prevention of sudden death after myocardial infarction. New Engl. J. Med. 302, 250–6.Google Scholar
  13. A Multicentre International Study: Supplementary Report. 1977. Reduction in mortality after myocardial infarction with long-term beta-adreno-ceptor blockade. Br. Med. J. ii, 419–21.Google Scholar
  14. Baber, N. S., Wainwright Evans, D., Howitt, G., Thomas, M., Wilson, C., Lewis, J. A. Davis, P. M., Hander, K., Tuson, R. 1980. Multicentre Post-infarction trial of propranolol in 49 hospitals in the United Kingdom, Italy and Yugoslavia. Br. Heart J. 44, 96–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. The Coronary Drug Project Research Group. 1980. Influence of adherence to treatment and response of cholesterol on mortality in the Coronary Drug Project. New Engl. J. Med. 303, 1038–41.Google Scholar
  16. Hjalmarson, A., Helitz, J., Malek, I., Ryden, L., Vedin, A., Waldenstrom, A., Wedel, H., Elmfeldt, D., Holmberg, S., Nyberg, G., Swedberg, K., Waagstein, F., Waldenstrom, J. Wilhelmsen, L., Whilhelmsson, C. 1981. Effect on mortality of metoprolol in acute mycordial infarction. Lancet ii, 823–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. W. Kay
    • 1
  • D. Moore
    • 1
  • I. M. Graham
    • 1
  1. 1.Cardiac DepartmentAdelaide and Meath HospitalsDublin 8

Personalised recommendations