Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical Research-Based Product Assessment

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Consumer Perception of Product Risks and Benefits

  • 2424 Accesses

Abstract

The clinical trial methodology of conducting experiments in humans has been, and still is, most developed in pharmacotherapy research. Although straightforward in theory, in practice the design and implementation of a conclusive clinical trial is a multifaceted exercise. Drawing valid conclusion on the effects of the experimental intervention on the investigated outcome also requires careful consideration as to how the collected data are to be analyzed. To avoid non-compliance and self-selection bias after randomization, the intention-to-treat analysis principle is widely adopted, analyzing patients according to treatment allocation, irrespective of actual exposure. After an overview of clinical trial-based therapy research, the question of the transportability of the methodology to consumer product research is addressed. Other than prescription drugs, consumer products and services are not externally allocated but selected by consumers directly, often from a variety of freely accessible alternative options. It becomes evident that this fundamental difference has profound implications on consumer product research methods, rendering intention-to-treat a meaningless concept and pointing towards the central role of considering consumer preferences, choices and actual use-based effect assessment.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
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

References

  • Altman, D. (2009). Missing outcomes in randomized trials: Addressing the dilemma. Open Medicine, 3, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Armijo-Olivo, S., Warren, S., & Magee, D. (2009). Intention to treat analysis, compliance, drop-outs and how to deal with missing data in clinical research: A review. The Physical Therapy Review, 14, 36–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brewin, C. R., & Bradley, C. (1989). Patient preferences and randomized clinical trials. British Medical Journal, 299, 313–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand-McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, N. (2010). What are randomized controlled trials good for? Philosophical Studies, 147, 59–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright, N. (2011). A philosopher’s view of the long road from RCTs to effectiveness. Lancet, 377, 1400–1401.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cochrane, A. L. (1972). Effectiveness and efficiency: Random reflections on health services. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospitals Trust.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeVries, J. G., & Berlet, G. C. (2010). Understanding levels of evidence for scientific communication. Foot & Ankle Specialist, 3, 305–309.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doll, R., & Hill, A. B. (1950). Smoking and carcinoma of the lung: Preliminary report. British Medical Journal, 2, 739–748.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doll, R., & Hill, A. B. (1964). Mortality in relation to smoking: Ten years’ observations of British doctors. British Medical Journal, 1, 1399–1410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feinman, R. D. (2009). Intention-to-treat. What is the question? Nutrition and Metabolism, 6, 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. A. (1925). Statistical methods for research workers. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gadenne, V. (2013). External validity and the new inductivism in experimental economics. Rationality Markets and Morals, 4, 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grahame-Smith, D. (1995). Evidence based medicine: Socratic dissent. British Medical Journal, 310, 1126–1127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenland, S. (2000). Instrumental variables for epidemiologists. International Journal of Epidemiology, 29, 722–729.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenland, S., & Pearl, J. (2011). Causal diagrams. In M. Lovric (Ed.), International encyclopedia of statistical science (pp. 208–216). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, S. K. (2011). Intention-to-treat concept: A review. Perspectives in Clinical Research, 2, 109–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernán, M. A., & Hernández-Diaz, S. (2012). Beyond the intention to treat in comparative effectiveness research. Clinical Trials, 9, 48–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernán, M.A., Alonso, A., Logan, R., Grodstein, F., Michels, K. B., Stampfer, M. J., Willett, W. C., Manson, J. E., & Robins, J. M. (2008). Observational studies analyzed like randomized experiments: An application to postmenopausal hormone therapy and coronary heart disease. Epidemiology, 19, 766–779.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernán, M. A., Hernández-Diaz, S., & Robins, J. M. (2013). Randomized trials analyzed as observational studies. Annals of Internal Medicine, 159, 560–562.

    Google Scholar 

  • Higgins, J. P. T., & Green, S. (Eds.). (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (V5.1.0). The Cochrane Collaboration. Accessed August 15, 2016. http://handbook.cochrane.org/

  • Hill, A. B. (1955). Principles of medical statistics (6th ed.). London: Lancet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, A. B. (1990). Suspended judgment: Memories of the British Streptomycin Trial in tuberculosis. The first randomized clinical trial. Controlled Clinical Trials, 11, 77–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ho, P. M., Peterson, P. N., & Masoudi, F. A. (2008). Evaluating the evidence. Is there a rigid hierarchy? Circulation, 118, 1675–1684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, J., Schirra, T., Lo, H., Neeb, L., Reuter, U., & Martus, P. (2015). The influence of weather on migraine—are migraine attacks predictable? Annals of Clinical and Translational Neurology, 2, 22–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hudgens, G., Gilbert, P. B., & Self, S. G. (2004). Endpoints in vaccine trials. Statistical Methods in Medical Research, 13, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ICH. (1998). Guidance for industry: E9 Statistical principles for clinical trials. Rockwell: US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Accessed August 15, 2016, from http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm073137.pdf

  • King, M., Nazareth, I., Lampe, F., Bower, P., Chandler, M., Morou, M., Sibbald, B., & Lai, R. (2005). Impact of participant and physician intervention preferences on randomized trials. JAMA, 293, 1089–1099.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, J. A., & Machin, D. (1993). Intention to treat—who should use ITT? British Journal of Cancer, 68, 647–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montedori, A., Bonacini, M. I., Casazza, G., Luchetta, M. L., Duca, F. C., & Abraha, I. (2011). Modified versus standard intention-to-treat reporting. Trials, 12, 58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morabia, A. (2013). Hume, Mill, Hill, and the sui generis epidemiologic approach to causal inference. American Journal of Epidemiology, 178, 1526–1532.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MRC Medical Research Council Streptomycin in Tuberculosis Trials Committee. (1948). Streptomycin treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis. British Medical Journal, 2, 769–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newell, D. (1992). Intention-to-treat analysis: Implications for quantitative and qualitative research. International Journal of Epidemiology, 21, 837–884.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J. (1923). On the application of probability theory to agricultural experiments. Essay on principles (Section 9). Statistical Science, 5, 465–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neyman, J., & Pearson, E. S. (1933). On the problem of the most efficient tests of statistical hypotheses. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London Series A, 231, 289–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. (1935). Logik der Forschung. Wien: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Robins, J. M., & Greenland, S. (1994). Adjusting for differential rates of PCP prophylaxis in high- versus low-dose AZT treatment arms in and AIDS randomized trial. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 89, 737–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika, 70, 41–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rubin, D. B. (1974). Estimating causal effects of treatments in randomized and nonrandomized treatments. Journal of Education & Psychology, 66, 688–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, K. J. (2014). Six persistent research misconceptions. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 29, 1060–1064.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sackett, D. L. (1989). Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest, 95(Suppl 2), 2–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sackett, D. L., & Wennberg, J. E. (1997). Choosing the best research design for each question. BMJ, 315, 1636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salsburg, D. (1994). Intent to treat: The reduction ad absurdum that became gospel. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 3, 329–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schafer, J. L., & Kang, J. (2008). Average causal effects from nonrandomized studies: A practical guide and simulated example. Psychological Methods, 13, 279–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, K. F., Altman, D. G., & Moher, D. (2010). CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63, 834–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Seligman, M. E. (1995). The effectiveness of psychotherapy. The Consumer Reports study. American Psychologist, 50, 965–974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheiner, L. B. (1991). The intellectual health of clinical drug evaluation. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics, 50, 4–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steckler, A., & McLeroy, K. R. (2008). The importance of external validity. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 9–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tannen, R. L., Weiner, M. G., Xie, D., & Barnhart, K. (2008). Perspectives on hormone replacement therapy: The Women’s Health Initiative and new observational studies sampling the overall population. Fertility and Sterility, 90, 258–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ten Have, T. R., Normand, S. L. T., Marcus, S. M., Brown, C. H., Lavori, P., & Duan, N. (2008). Intent-to-treat vs. non-intent-to-treat analyses under treatment non-adherence in mental health randomized trials. Psychiatric Annals, 38, 772–783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tolman, E. C. (1932). Purposive behavior in animals and men. New York: Appleton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Victor, T. W., Hu, X., Campbell, J. C., Buse, D. C., & Lipton, R. B. (2010). Migraine prevalence by age and sex in the United States: A life-span study. Cephalalgia, 30, 1065–1072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weitkunat, R., Lee, P. N., Baker, G., Sponsiello-Wang, Z., González-Zuloeta Ladd, A. M., & Lüdicke, F. (2015). A novel approach to assess the population health impact of introducing a Modified Risk Tobacco Product. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, 72, 87–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weitkunat, R., Baker, G., & Lüdicke, F. (2016). Intention-to-treat analysis but for treatment intention: How should consumer product randomized controlled trials be analyzed? International Journal Statistics Medical Research, 5, 90–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wennberg, J. E., Barry, M. J., Fowler, F. J., & Mulley, A. (1993). Outcomes research, PORTs, and health care reform. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 703, 52–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, S. G., Duan, N., Pequegnat, W., Gaist, P., Des Jarlais, D. C., Holtgrave, D., Szapocznik, J., Fishbein, M., Rapkin, B., Clatts, M., & Mullen, P. D. (2008). Alternatives to the randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Public Health, 98, 1359–1366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Worrall, J. (2007). Why there’s no cause to randomize. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 58, 451–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zelen, M. (1990). Randomized consent designs for clinical trials: An update. Statistics in Medicine, 9, 645–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Philip Morris Products SA, Quai Jeanrenaud 5, 2000, Neuchatel, Switzerland

    Rolf Weitkunat

Authors
  1. Rolf Weitkunat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rolf Weitkunat .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Clinique du Nord, Port Louis, Mauritius

    Gerard Emilien

  2. Philip Morris Products S.A, Neuchâtel, Switzerland

    Rolf Weitkunat

  3. Philip Morris Products S.A, Neuchâtel, Switzerland

    Frank Lüdicke

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Weitkunat, R. (2017). Clinical Research-Based Product Assessment. In: Emilien, G., Weitkunat, R., Lüdicke, F. (eds) Consumer Perception of Product Risks and Benefits. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50530-5_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation