Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 1/2004

01-01-2004 | Controversies—Against

Do we need randomised trials to evaluate diagnostic procedures?

Author: Peter E. Valk

Published in: European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging | Issue 1/2004

Login to get access

Excerpt

The randomized controlled trial (RCT) was developed for comparing the effectiveness of two or more therapeutic modalities, and provides the only reliable means of performing such a comparison. Because one patient cannot be treated by two different methods at the same time, two patient populations are required for comparison of a new treatment and a reference method. As a result, it becomes necessary to accrue large patient numbers in an attempt to even out the variations in patient characteristics and disease severity that occur in a random fashion. The number of patients required depends on the expected magnitude of the difference between the two methods under investigation, compared with the magnitude of random population differences. …
Literature
1.
go back to reference Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making 1991; 11:88–94.PubMed Fryback DG, Thornbury JR. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med Decis Making 1991; 11:88–94.PubMed
2.
go back to reference Fineberg HV. Evaluation of computed tomography: achievement and challenge. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1978; 131:1–4. Fineberg HV. Evaluation of computed tomography: achievement and challenge. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1978; 131:1–4.
3.
go back to reference Thornbury JR, Kido DK, Mushlin AI, Phelps CE, Mooney C, Fryback DG. Increasing the scientific quality of clinical efficacy studies of magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 1991; 26:829–833.PubMed Thornbury JR, Kido DK, Mushlin AI, Phelps CE, Mooney C, Fryback DG. Increasing the scientific quality of clinical efficacy studies of magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 1991; 26:829–833.PubMed
4.
go back to reference Begg CB, McNeil BJ. Assessment of radiologic tests: control of bias and other design considerations. Radiology 1988; 167:565–569.PubMed Begg CB, McNeil BJ. Assessment of radiologic tests: control of bias and other design considerations. Radiology 1988; 167:565–569.PubMed
5.
go back to reference Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University Health Sciences Center. How to read journals. II. To learn about a diagnostic test. Can Med Assoc J 1981; 124:703–710.PubMed Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University Health Sciences Center. How to read journals. II. To learn about a diagnostic test. Can Med Assoc J 1981; 124:703–710.PubMed
6.
go back to reference Management Decision and Research Center Technology Assessment Program. Positron emission tomography: descriptive analysis of experience with PET in VA and systemic reviews: FDG PET as a diagnostic test for cancer and Alzheimer’s disease. Washington, DC: Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 1996. Management Decision and Research Center Technology Assessment Program. Positron emission tomography: descriptive analysis of experience with PET in VA and systemic reviews: FDG PET as a diagnostic test for cancer and Alzheimer’s disease. Washington, DC: Veterans Health Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, 1996.
7.
go back to reference Cook DK, Guyatt GH, Laupacis A, Sackett DL. Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest 1991; 102:305S–311S. Cook DK, Guyatt GH, Laupacis A, Sackett DL. Rules of evidence and clinical recommendations on the use of antithrombotic agents. Chest 1991; 102:305S–311S.
Metadata
Title
Do we need randomised trials to evaluate diagnostic procedures?
Author
Peter E. Valk
Publication date
01-01-2004
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging / Issue 1/2004
Print ISSN: 1619-7070
Electronic ISSN: 1619-7089
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00259-003-1385-9

Other articles of this Issue 1/2004

European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging 1/2004 Go to the issue