Document Detail


Failure to adopt beneficial therapies caused by bias in medical evidence evaluation.
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  17099195     Owner:  NLM     Status:  MEDLINE    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
BACKGROUND: Although it is known that many evidence-based therapies are underutilized, the causes of the research-practice gap are not well understood. The authors sought to determine if there is a bias in the evaluation of new evidence that leads to low rates of adoption of beneficial therapies compared to abandonment of harmful ones. METHODS: Two case vignettes describing hypothetical clinical trials were administered to 2 independent samples of pulmonary and critical care practitioners. Each vignette was presented in 2 different ways; in one version, the results of the hypothetical trial showed that a treatment was harmful, and in the other version, the same treatment was shown to be beneficial. Prospective respondents from each sample were randomized to receive 1 version of each vignette (intersubject design). The main outcome was respondent's willingness to apply the results of the hypothetical trial to patient care. RESULTS: There were 174 participants for trial 1 and 138 participants for trial 2 (enrollment rates of 44.2% and 41.8%, respectively). For trial 1, respondents were 2.3 times less likely to change clinical practice based on results indicating benefit as opposed to harm (33.3% v. 76.5%; P < 0.0001). Similarly, for trial 2, respondents were 2.57 times less likely to change practice when trial results showed that early use was beneficial as opposed to showing that early use was harmful (37.1% v. 95.3%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: When evaluating clinical trials, physicians demonstrate less willingness to adopt beneficial therapies than to abandon harmful ones. This difference may contribute to the research-practice gap.
Authors:
Scott K Aberegg; Hal Arkes; Peter B Terry
Related Documents :
22587635 - Predictive value of symptoms for quality of life in first-episode schizophrenia.
22646975 - Effects of guided imagery with relaxation training on anxiety and quality of life among...
22695365 - Centralization and directional preference: a systematic review.
15682975 - A study on transmission and a trial of chemoprophylaxis in contacts of leprosy patients...
17175425 - The effect of injection of two vs 10 ml saline on the subsequent spread and quality of ...
20352025 - Smell perception in normal tension glaucoma patients.
Publication Detail:
Type:  Journal Article; Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural    
Journal Detail:
Title:  Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making     Volume:  26     ISSN:  0272-989X     ISO Abbreviation:  Med Decis Making     Publication Date:    2006 Nov-Dec
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2006-11-13     Completed Date:  2007-02-28     Revised Date:  2008-11-21    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  8109073     Medline TA:  Med Decis Making     Country:  United States    
Other Details:
Languages:  eng     Pagination:  575-82     Citation Subset:  IM    
Affiliation:
Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions,Department of Medicine, Division of Pulmonary and Critical CareMedicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. scottaberegg@gmail.com
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:
Attitude of Health Personnel*
Critical Care
Decision Support Techniques*
Diffusion of Innovation*
Ethics, Medical
Evidence-Based Medicine
Guideline Adherence*
Harm Reduction
Humans
Prospective Studies
Pulmonary Medicine
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Treatment Failure
Treatment Outcome
Grant Support
ID/Acronym/Agency:
IF32HL078167-01/HL/NHLBI NIH HHS

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine


Previous Document:  Decision curve analysis: a novel method for evaluating prediction models.
Next Document:  Teaching medical decision modeling: a qualitative description of student errors and curriculum respo...