Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice

3Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

There is a lack of high-quality evidence underpinning many contemporary clinical practice guidelines embedded in the healthcare systems, leading to treatment uncertainty and practice variation in most medical disciplines. Comparative effectiveness trials (CETs) represent a diverse range of research that focuses on optimising health outcomes by comparing currently approved interventions to generate high-quality evidence to inform decision makers. Yet, despite their ability to produce real-world evidence that addresses the key priorities of patients and health systems, many implementation challenges exist within the healthcare environment. This manuscript aims to highlight common barriers to conducting CETs and describes potential solutions to normalise their conduct as part of a learning healthcare system.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Briffa, T., Symons, T., Zeps, N., Straiton, N., Tarnow-Mordi, W. O., Simes, J., … Williams, C. M. (2021). Normalising comparative effectiveness trials as clinical practice. Trials, 22(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-021-05566-1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free