Abstract
Evidence-based medicine has changed clinical practice by incorporating data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). While some biases in RCTs are well recognised, we discuss some less acknowledged. Selection bias may arise in the consent stage. Industry-funded studies more often report a positive outcome. Post-hoc changes of outcome measures and other mis-reporting lowers the reliability of outcome data. Finally, even the GRADE system retains subjectivity. CONCLUSION: Moving from "intuition" into "evidence-based" medicine involves grappling with several pitfalls. These pose challenges for authors, editors, reviewers, and readers. All require vigilance before drawing conclusions from presented data.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
