Skip to main content

Clinical Evaluative Research: Which Patients Benefit, How and When? A Contribution to a European Discussion

  • Chapter
  • 1109 Accesses

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight 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

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Council of Europe (1997) Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine

    Google Scholar 

  2. Council of Europe, Steering Committee on Bioethics (2003) Draft Additional Protocol to the Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, on Biomedical Research.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Djulbegovic B, Lacevic D, Cantor A et al. (2000) The uncertainty principle and industry-sponsored research. Lancet 365:635–638

    Google Scholar 

  4. Grady C (2002) Ethical principles in clinical research. In: Gallin JI (Ed.) Principles and practice of clinical research. Academic Press, San Diego, P 15–26

    Google Scholar 

  5. Heart Protection Study Collaborative Group (2002) MRC/BHF Heart Protection Study of cholesterol lowering with simvastatin in 20 536 high-risk individuals: a randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 360: 7–22

    Google Scholar 

  6. Levitan HL (1981) Patterns of hostility revealed in the fantasies and dreams of women with rheumatoid arthritis. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics 35:34–43

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  7. Melander H, Ahlquist-Rastad J, Meijer G, Beermann B (2003) Evidence b(i)ased medicine — selective reporting from studies sponsored by pharmaceutical industry: review of studies in new drug applications. BMJ 326:1171–1173

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Riggs LB, Hodgson SB, O’Fallon M et al. (1990) Effect of Fluoride treatment on the fracture rate in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. New England Journal of Medicine 322:802–809

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  9. Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (2000) Ethics Advisory Committee: Guidelines for the ethical conduct of medical research involving children. Archives of Disease in Childhood 82:177–182

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sackett D, Haynes RB (2002) Evidence base of clinical diagnosis. The architecture of diagnostic research. BMJ 324:539–541

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Group (1994) Randomised trial of cholesterol lowering in 4444 patients with coronary heart disease: The Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S). Lancet 344: 1383–1389

    Google Scholar 

  12. Shepherd J, Cobbe SM, Ford I et al. (1995) Prevention of coronary heart disease with pravastatin in men with hypercholesterolemia. New England Journal of Medicine 333:1301–1307

    Article  PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  13. Shepherd J, Blauw GJ, Murphy MB et al. (2002) Pravastatin in elderly individuals at risk of vascular disease (PROSPER): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 360:1623–1630

    PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  14. The European Parliament and the Council (2001) Directive on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the implementation of good clinical practice in the conduct of clinical trials on medicinal products for human use. Official Journal of the European Communities 121:34–44

    Google Scholar 

  15. The West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study Group (1992) A coronary primary prevention study of Scottish men aged 45-64 years: trial design. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 45:849–860

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wells G, Beaton D, Shea B et al. (2001) Minimal clinically important differences: Review of methods. Journal of Rheumatology 28: 406–412

    PubMed  CAS  ISI  Google Scholar 

  17. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki (2002) Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects. WMA, Washington

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Raspe, H. (2005). Clinical Evaluative Research: Which Patients Benefit, How and When? A Contribution to a European Discussion. In: ter Meulen, R., Biller-Andorno, N., Lenk, C., Lie, R.K. (eds) Evidence-based Practice in Medicine and Health Care. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-27133-3_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-27133-3_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-22239-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-27133-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics