Challenges in systematic reviews that evaluate drug efficacy or effectiveness

P. Lina Santaguida, Mark Helfand, Parminder Raina

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

24 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Increasingly, consumers, clinicians, regulatory bodies, and insurers are using systematic reviews of drug interventions to select treatments and set policies. Although a systematic review cannot provide all the information a clinician needs to make an informed choice for therapy, it can help decision makers distinguish what claims about effectiveness are based on evidence, identify critical information gaps, describe features of the evidence that limit applicability in practice, and address whether drug effectiveness differs for particular subgroups of patients. To improve the relevance and validity of reviews of drug therapies, reviewers need to delineate clinically important subgroups, specific aims of therapy, and most important outcomes. They may need to find unpublished trials, studies other than direct comparator (head-to-head) trials, and additional details of published trials from pharmaceutical manufacturers and regulatory agencies. In this paper, we address ways to formulate questions relevant to specific clinical therapeutic aims; discuss types of studies to include in drug efficacy and effectiveness reviews and how to find them; and describe ways to assess applicability of studies to actual practice.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1066-1072
Number of pages7
JournalAnnals of Internal Medicine
Volume142
Issue number12 II
StatePublished - Jun 21 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Pharmaceutical Preparations
Insurance Carriers
Therapeutics
Drug Therapy

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Challenges in systematic reviews that evaluate drug efficacy or effectiveness. / Santaguida, P. Lina; Helfand, Mark; Raina, Parminder.

In: Annals of Internal Medicine, Vol. 142, No. 12 II, 21.06.2005, p. 1066-1072.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Santaguida, P. Lina ; Helfand, Mark ; Raina, Parminder. / Challenges in systematic reviews that evaluate drug efficacy or effectiveness. In: Annals of Internal Medicine. 2005 ; Vol. 142, No. 12 II. pp. 1066-1072.
@article{34fd0bd03db34de09627e94445be98eb,
title = "Challenges in systematic reviews that evaluate drug efficacy or effectiveness",
abstract = "Increasingly, consumers, clinicians, regulatory bodies, and insurers are using systematic reviews of drug interventions to select treatments and set policies. Although a systematic review cannot provide all the information a clinician needs to make an informed choice for therapy, it can help decision makers distinguish what claims about effectiveness are based on evidence, identify critical information gaps, describe features of the evidence that limit applicability in practice, and address whether drug effectiveness differs for particular subgroups of patients. To improve the relevance and validity of reviews of drug therapies, reviewers need to delineate clinically important subgroups, specific aims of therapy, and most important outcomes. They may need to find unpublished trials, studies other than direct comparator (head-to-head) trials, and additional details of published trials from pharmaceutical manufacturers and regulatory agencies. In this paper, we address ways to formulate questions relevant to specific clinical therapeutic aims; discuss types of studies to include in drug efficacy and effectiveness reviews and how to find them; and describe ways to assess applicability of studies to actual practice.",
author = "Santaguida, {P. Lina} and Mark Helfand and Parminder Raina",
year = "2005",
month = "6",
day = "21",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "142",
pages = "1066--1072",
journal = "Annals of Internal Medicine",
issn = "0003-4819",
publisher = "American College of Physicians",
number = "12 II",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Challenges in systematic reviews that evaluate drug efficacy or effectiveness

AU - Santaguida, P. Lina

AU - Helfand, Mark

AU - Raina, Parminder

PY - 2005/6/21

Y1 - 2005/6/21

N2 - Increasingly, consumers, clinicians, regulatory bodies, and insurers are using systematic reviews of drug interventions to select treatments and set policies. Although a systematic review cannot provide all the information a clinician needs to make an informed choice for therapy, it can help decision makers distinguish what claims about effectiveness are based on evidence, identify critical information gaps, describe features of the evidence that limit applicability in practice, and address whether drug effectiveness differs for particular subgroups of patients. To improve the relevance and validity of reviews of drug therapies, reviewers need to delineate clinically important subgroups, specific aims of therapy, and most important outcomes. They may need to find unpublished trials, studies other than direct comparator (head-to-head) trials, and additional details of published trials from pharmaceutical manufacturers and regulatory agencies. In this paper, we address ways to formulate questions relevant to specific clinical therapeutic aims; discuss types of studies to include in drug efficacy and effectiveness reviews and how to find them; and describe ways to assess applicability of studies to actual practice.

AB - Increasingly, consumers, clinicians, regulatory bodies, and insurers are using systematic reviews of drug interventions to select treatments and set policies. Although a systematic review cannot provide all the information a clinician needs to make an informed choice for therapy, it can help decision makers distinguish what claims about effectiveness are based on evidence, identify critical information gaps, describe features of the evidence that limit applicability in practice, and address whether drug effectiveness differs for particular subgroups of patients. To improve the relevance and validity of reviews of drug therapies, reviewers need to delineate clinically important subgroups, specific aims of therapy, and most important outcomes. They may need to find unpublished trials, studies other than direct comparator (head-to-head) trials, and additional details of published trials from pharmaceutical manufacturers and regulatory agencies. In this paper, we address ways to formulate questions relevant to specific clinical therapeutic aims; discuss types of studies to include in drug efficacy and effectiveness reviews and how to find them; and describe ways to assess applicability of studies to actual practice.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=20544459358&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=20544459358&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 15968031

AN - SCOPUS:20544459358

VL - 142

SP - 1066

EP - 1072

JO - Annals of Internal Medicine

JF - Annals of Internal Medicine

SN - 0003-4819

IS - 12 II

ER -