Electronic Trial Banks: A Complementary Method for Reporting Randomized Trials

Ida Sim, Douglas K. Owens, Philip W. Lavori and Glenn D. Rennels
Additional contact information
Ida Sim: Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr Sim: Department of Medicine, and Medical Information Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 400 Parnassus Avenue, Room A-405, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; telephone: (415) 502-1954; fax: (415) 476-7964; e-mail:
Douglas K. Owens: Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr Sim: Department of Medicine, and Medical Information Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 400 Parnassus Avenue, Room A-405, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; telephone: (415) 502-1954; fax: (415) 476-7964; e-mail:
Philip W. Lavori: Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr Sim: Department of Medicine, and Medical Information Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 400 Parnassus Avenue, Room A-405, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; telephone: (415) 502-1954; fax: (415) 476-7964; e-mail:
Glenn D. Rennels: Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr Sim: Department of Medicine, and Medical Information Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, 400 Parnassus Avenue, Room A-405, San Francisco, CA 94143-0320; telephone: (415) 502-1954; fax: (415) 476-7964; e-mail:

Medical Decision Making, 2000, vol. 20, issue 4, 440-450

Abstract: Background. Randomized clinical trial (RCT) results are often difficult to find, interpret, or apply to clinical care. The authors propose that RCTs be reported into electronic knowledge bases—trial banks—in addition to being reported in text. What information should these trial-bank reports contain? Methods. Using the competency decomposition method, the authors specified the ideal trial-bank contents as the information necessary and sufficient for completing the task of systematic reviewing. Results. They decomposed the systematic reviewing task into four top-level tasks and 62 subtasks. 162 types of trial information were necessary and sufficient for completing these subtasks. These items relate to a trial's design, execution, administration, and results. Conclusion. Trial-bank publishing of these 162 items would capture into computer-understandable form all the trial information needed for critically appraising and synthesizing trial results. Decision-support systems that access shared, up-to-date trial banks could help clinicians manage, synthesize, and apply RCT evidence more effectively. Key words: electronic publishing; knowledge bases; clinical trials; meta-analysis. (Med Decis Making 2000;20:440-450)

Date: 2000
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X0002000408 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:medema:v:20:y:2000:i:4:p:440-450

DOI: 10.1177/0272989X0002000408

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Medical Decision Making
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().