Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorEl Dib, Regina [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDib, Regina El
dc.contributor.authorJorge, Eliane Chaves [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorKamegasawa, Amélia [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDaher, Solange Ramires [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorSpagnuolo, Regina Stella [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorda Silva, Marise Pereira [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBraga, Gabriel Pereira [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorVolpato, Enilze [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorMódolo, Norma Sueli Pinheiro [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBetini, Marluci [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDo Valle, Adriana [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorCorrêa, Ione [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBazan, Rodrigo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorAlmeida, Ricardo Augusto M. B. [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorWeber, Silke Anna Theresa [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorMolina, Silvana [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorYoo, Hugo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBoas, Paulo Villas [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorCorrente, José Eduardo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorMathew, Joseph
dc.contributor.authorKapoor, Anil
dc.contributor.authorCarvalho, Raíssa Pierri [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorVital, Roberto Bezerra [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorBraz, Leandro Gobbo [UNESP]
dc.contributor.authorDo Nascimento Junior, Paulo [UNESP]
dc.date.accessioned2018-12-11T17:25:43Z
dc.date.available2018-12-11T17:25:43Z
dc.date.issued2015-01-01
dc.identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.6061/clinics/2015(09)04
dc.identifier.citationClinics, v. 70, n. 9, p. 618-622, 2015.
dc.identifier.issn1807-5932
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11449/177491
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVE: We refer to the effectiveness (known as pragmatic or real world) and efficacy (known as explanatory or desired or ideal world) of interventions. However, these terms seem to be randomly chosen by investigators who design clinical trials and do not always reflect the true purpose of the study. A pragmaticexplanatory continuum indicator summary tool was thus developed with the aim of identifying the characteristics of clinical trials that distinguish between effectiveness and efficacy issues. We verified whether clinical trials used the criteria proposed by the indicator summary tool, and we categorized these clinical trials according to a new classification. METHOD: A systematic survey of randomized clinical trials was performed. We added a score ranging from 0 (more efficacious) to 10 (more effective) to each domain of the indicator summary tool and proposed the following classifications: high efficacy (<25), moderate efficacy (25-50), moderate effectiveness (51-75), and high effectiveness (<75). RESULTS: A total of 844 randomized trials were analyzed. No analyzed trials used the criteria proposed by the indicator summary tool. Approximately 44% of the trials were classified as having moderate effectiveness, and 43.82% were classified as having moderate efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Most clinical trials used the term “efficacy” to illustrate the application of results in clinical practice, but the majority of those were classified as having moderate effectiveness according to our proposed score. The classification based on the 0-100 score is still highly subjective and can be easily misunderstood in all domains based on each investigator’s own experiences and knowledge.en
dc.format.extent618-622
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofClinics
dc.sourceScopus
dc.subjectClinical medicine
dc.subjectClinical trials
dc.subjectEffectiveness
dc.subjectEfficacy
dc.subjectEvidence-based medicine
dc.subjectResearch
dc.titleDifferences between the real and the desired worlds in the results of clinical trialsen
dc.typeArtigo
dc.contributor.institutionUniversidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
dc.contributor.institutionMcMaster University, McMaster Institute of Urology
dc.contributor.institutionPediatric Pulmonology, PGIMER
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.description.affiliationMcMaster University, McMaster Institute of Urology
dc.description.affiliationUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp), Bioscience Institute, Biostatistics Department
dc.description.affiliationPediatric Pulmonology, PGIMER
dc.description.affiliationUnespUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
dc.description.affiliationUnespUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp), Bioscience Institute, Biostatistics Department
dc.identifier.doi10.6061/clinics/2015(09)04
dc.rights.accessRightsAcesso restrito
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-84941619611
dc.relation.ispartofsjr0,536
Localize o texto completo

Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record