title: Critical Appraisal of Randomized Clinical Trials: Can We Have Faith in the Conclusions?
abstract: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are the most appropriate research design for studying the effectiveness of a specific intervention. Its results are considered as the highest 'level of evidence'. Published reports on RCTs have already succeeded in a peer review process, but still there can be undetected major deficiencies of the study that may question the reported outcome. It is still up to the readers to assess the quality of publications and to question if the published results apply to their patients. The major points of such a critical appraisal process are reviewed and discussed with a focus on breast cancer studies.
authors.affiliation: Core Unit for Medical Statistics and Informatics, Section of Clinical Biometrics, Medical University of Vienna, Austria.
authors.forename: Martina
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Mittlböck
references.citation: JAMA. 1994 Jan 5;271(1):59-63
references.pmid: 8258890
references.citation: BMJ. 1999 Jul 17;319(7203):185
references.pmid: 10406763
references.citation: Lancet. 2000 Mar 25;355(9209):1064-9
references.pmid: 10744093
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 2001 Apr 17;134(8):663-94
references.pmid: 11304107
references.citation: JAMA. 1999 Aug 25;282(8):771-8
references.pmid: 10463714
references.citation: JAMA. 1993 Dec 1;270(21):2598-601
references.pmid: 8230645
references.citation: Lancet. 1990 Jan 20;335(8682):149-53
references.pmid: 1967441
references.citation: Ann Intern Med. 1992 Jan 1;116(1):78-84
references.pmid: 1530753
references.citation: Methods Inf Med. 2007;46(6):655-61
references.pmid: 18066415