Evidence-based Medicine and Clinical Guidelines in Cardiology. Promoting Science, Practice, or Bureaucracy?

  • Frank Praetorius

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    ALLHAT Collaborative Research Group (2002) Major Outcomes in High-Risk Hypertensive Patients Randomized to Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitor or Calcium Channel Blocker vs Diuretic. JAMA 288:2981–2997Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Antoni DH, Beuckelmann D, Hambrecht R et al. (2002) Therapie mit Beta-Adrenorezeptorantagonisten bei der chronischen Herzinsuffizienz. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 127:2459–63PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    AAMC Task Force on Financial Conflicts of Interest in Clinical Research (2001) Protecting Subjects, Preserving Trust, Promoting Progress. Policy and Guidelines for the Oversight of Individual Financial Interests in Human Subjects Research. http://www.aamc.org/members/coitf/firstreport.pdfGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bertrand ME, Simoons ML, Fox KA et al. (2002) Management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation. European Heart Journal 23:1809–1840PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Califf RM, DeMets DL (2002) Principles From Clinical Trials Relevant to Clinical Practice: Part I. Circulation 106:1015–1021PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Califf RM, DeMets DL (2002) Part II. Circulation 106: 1172–1175PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chaudhry S, Schroter S, Smith R, Morris J (2002) Does declaration of competing interests affect readers’ perceptions? A randomised trial. BMJ 325:1391–2CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Choudhry NK, Stelfox HT, Detsky AS (2002) Relationships Between Authors of Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Pharmaceutical Industry. JAMA 287:612–617CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Davidoff F et al. (2001) Sponsorship, Authorship, and Accountability. New England Journal of Medicine 345:825–827CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    DeMets DL, Califf RM (2002) Lessons Learned From Recent Cardiovascular Clinical Trials: Part I. Circulation 106:746–751PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    DeMets DL, Califf RM (2002) Part II. Circulation 106: 880–886PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Deng MC et al., COCPIT Study Group (2000) Effect of receiving a heart transplant. BMJ 321:540–5CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (1999) Klinische Forschung — Denkschrift. ©2002-3 http://www.dfg.deGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dierks C (2003) Legal implications of guidelines. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 128:815–819PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dissmann W, Ridder M de (2002) The soft science of German cardiology. Lancet 359:2027–29 Discussion: Interventional cardiology in Germany. Lancet 360: 1694-96CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Erbel R, Engel HJ, Kübler W et al. (1997) Interventionelle Koronartherapie. Zei tschrift fur Kardiologie 86:1040–1063Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Erdmann E, Hoppe UC (2001) Leitlinien zur Therapie der chronischen Herzinsuffizienz. Zeitschrift fur Kardiologie 90: 218–237PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fletcher GF (2001) Exercise Standards for Testing and Training. Circulation 104:1694–1740PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Freedman B (1987) Equipoise and the ethics of clinical research. New England Journal of Medicine 317:1415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Goodman SN (2002) The mammography dilemma: A crisis for Evidence-Based Medicine? Annals of Internal Medicine 137:363–65PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Haynes RB, Devereaux PJ, Guyatt GH (2002) Physicians’ and patients’ choices in evidence based Practice. Evidence does not make decisions, people do. BMJ 324:1350CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Joost HG (2003) Welche Interaktionen gibt es bei gleichzeitiger Gabe von ASS und ACE-Hemmern? Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 128: 398PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kuhlmann E (1999) Between informed consent and denying information: patient information under economical constraints. Ethik Med 11: 146–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kuhn TS (1962) Die Struktur wissenschaftlicher Revolutionen. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am MainGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kunz R, Ollenschläger G et al. (2000) Lehrbuch Evidenzbasierte Medizin in Klinik und Praxis. Deutscher Ärzteverlag, KölnGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lauterbach KW, Redaèlli M (2002) Evidence based medicine in der Kardiologie. Cardio News 4:41–42Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lenzer J (2002) Alteplase for stroke: money and optimistic claims buttress the “brain attack” campaign. BMJ 324: 723–726 Saver JL, Kidwell CS, Starkman S (2002) Commentary: Thrombolysis in stroke: it works! BMJ 324: 727-729CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Messerli F (2002) Life protection: Learnings from new clinical trials in hypertension. The world after ALLHAT. DavosGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pearson TA, Mensah GA, Wayne Alexander R et al. (2003) Markers of Inflammation and Cardiovascular Disease. Circulation 107:499–511 http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/reprint/107/3/499.pdfPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pendleton D, King J (2002) Values and leadership. BMJ 325: 1352–5CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Perleth M, Raspe H (1998) Evidenz-basierte Medizin: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen. Münchener Medizinische Wochenschrift 140:99–102Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Poole-Wilson P (2003) Priorities in health care and ethical considerations. Davos Lecture, Febr. 14, 2003Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Praetorius F (1992) Bayes City: The Objectivity of Indications (Bayes-Stadt... Ein Plädoyer für den diagnoseführenden Arzt). Deutsches Ärzteblatt 89:2113–2120Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Praetorius F, Sahm S (2001) The Ethical Aspect of Regularisation in Medicine. Ethik Med 13:221–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Praetorius F (1999) Coronary Angioplasty (PTCA) Registry of the German Community Hospitals: Ethical Consequences of an Internal Quality Control. (Selbstbegrenzung als Modell?) Ethik Med 11:89–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Praetorius F (2003) Nach der finalen Reform — Traum eines Kardiologen. Deutsches Ärzteblatt 100:3212Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Raspe H (2001) “Die Heilkunde wird eine Wissenschaft sein, oder sie wird nicht sein.” Zeitschrift für Ärztliche Fortbildung und Qualitatssicherung 95:495–501PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Rogler G, Schölmerich J (2000) “Evidence-Biased Medicine” — oder: Die trügerische Sicherheit der Evidenz. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 125:1122–1128PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ruskin JN (1989) The Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression Trial (CAST). New England Journal of Medicine 321:386–388PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Schulman KA, Seils DM et al. (2002) A National Survey of Provisions in Clinical-Trial Agreements between Medical Schools and Industry Sponsors. New England Journal of Medicine 347:1335–1341CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Senges J, Gitt AK (2002) Reicht die zur Verfügung stehende Datenmenge und Datenqualität aus, um medizinische Entscheidungen abzusichern? Evidence-based Medicine. 68. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für KardiologieGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Smith R (2002) Making progress with competing interests. BMJ 325:1375–1376PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Sox HC, Hickam DH, Marton KL et al. (1990) Using the Patient’s History to Estimate the Probability of Coronary Artery Disease: A Comparison of Primary, Care and Referral Practices. American Journal of Medicine 89:7–14CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    The ASSENT-3 Investigators (2001) Efficacy and safety of tenecteplase in combination with enoxaparin, abciximab, or unfractionated heparin. Lancet 358:605–13Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Topol EJ, Califf RM, Van de Werf F et al. (1997) Perspectives on large-scale cardiovascular clinical trials for the new millennium. Circulation 95:1072–1082PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Trappe HJ, Löllgen H (2000) Leitlinien zur Ergometrie. Zeitschrift fur Kardiologie 89:821–837PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Vogd W (2002) An Increase in Professionalization or Erosion of Medical Autonomy? The Implications of Evidence Based Medicine and the New Functional Elites in Medicine Seen from the Perspective of Systems and Interaction Theory. (Professionalisierungsschub oder Auflösung ärztlicher Autonomie?). Zeitschrift für Soziologie 31: 294–315Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Von Schacky C (2002) Koronare Herzkrankheit. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift 127:2429–2431Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Yusuf S, Cairns JA et al. (2002) Evidence-based Cardiology. BMJ Books, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Praetorius

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations