cwbe coordinatez:
101
63539
63556
63998
5604769

ABSOLUT
KYBERIA
permissions
you: r,
system: public
net: yes

neurons

stats|by_visit|by_K
source
tiamat
K|my_K|given_K
last
commanders
polls

total descendants::5
total children::1
show[ 2 | 3] flat


That question has been central to Ioannidis’s career. He’s what’s known as a meta-researcher, and he’s become one of the world’s foremost experts on the credibility of medical research. He and his team have shown, again and again, and in many different ways, that much of what biomedical researchers conclude in published studies—conclusions that doctors keep in mind when they prescribe antibiotics or blood-pressure medication, or when they advise us to consume more fiber or less meat, or when they recommend surgery for heart disease or back pain—is misleading, exaggerated, and often flat-out wrong. He charges that as much as 90 percent of the published medical information that doctors rely on is flawed.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/11/lies-damned-lies-and-medical-science/8269/




000001010006353900063556000639980560476905605489
Thunder Perfect Mind
 Thunder Perfect Mind      18.10.2010 - 17:58:42 , level: 1, UP   NEW
His model predicted, in different fields of medical research, rates of wrongness roughly corresponding to the observed rates at which findings were later convincingly refuted: 80 percent of non-randomized studies (by far the most common type) turn out to be wrong, as do 25 percent of supposedly gold-standard randomized trials, and as much as 10 percent of the platinum-standard large randomized trials.
by far the most common type? of what?

A randomized controlled trial (RCT) is a type of scientific experiment most commonly used in testing the efficacy or effectiveness of healthcare services (such as medicine or nursing) or health technologies (such as pharmaceuticals, medical devices or surgery).

toto sa mi ale paci:
We could solve much of the wrongness problem, Ioannidis says, if the world simply stopped expecting scientists to be right. That’s because being wrong in science is fine, and even necessary—as long as scientists recognize that they blew it, report their mistake openly instead of disguising it as a success, and then move on to the next thing, until they come up with the very occasional genuine breakthrough. But as long as careers remain contingent on producing a stream of research that’s dressed up to seem more right than it is, scientists will keep delivering exactly that.

00000101000635390006355600063998056047690560548905606269
Tomáš, to sa vie
 Tomáš, to sa vie      19.10.2010 - 08:27:48 , level: 2, UP   NEW
v clanku je to silne tvrdenie, ale imho aj wikipedia prehana
non-randomized su lacnejsie a v principe jednoduchsie, tak logicky ich asi bude vela
"most commmonly used" moze znamenat, ze aj ked existuje mnozstvo nerandomizovanych studii, nikto ich vsak nepovazuje za relevantne a preto su mimo mnoziny nasho zaujmu - z pohladu autora wikipedia entry

0000010100063539000635560006399805604769056054890560626905606451
Thunder Perfect Mind
 Thunder Perfect Mind      19.10.2010 - 10:15:40 , level: 3, UP   NEW
myslim ze wikipedia neprehana, ak si precitas celu vetu, a dal som to sem preto ze v clanku sa miesa vselico a mohol vzniknut dojem (u mna vznikol) ze pise aj o testoch lieciv na ktorych zaklade sa povoluju a ze ten vyrok sa tyka aj ich.

000001010006353900063556000639980560476905605489056062690560645105610077
Tomáš, to sa vie
 Tomáš, to sa vie      21.10.2010 - 09:09:23 , level: 4, UP   NEW
mozno ten clanok naraza aj na tieto praktiky:

Once a drug is approved for at least one indication, it may be prescribed off-label for a different condition, a different population, or in a different dose than what the drug is approved for. However, off-label uses have not been subject to the testing and review that is a precondition for marketing approval. The scientific review of evidence of effectiveness and safety that regulators weigh prior to approval for a labeled indication protects the patient. With off-label use, this protection often does not exist.
http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050210

000001010006353900063556000639980560476905605489056062690560645105606719
Tomáš, to sa vie
 Tomáš, to sa vie      19.10.2010 - 12:22:09 , level: 4, UP   NEW
no ano, priamo to tam uvedene nie je, ale autor clanku to sikovne napisal :)