Resources for Clinical Research in the JID
- From 2005 to 2015, the publication of noninferiority trials increased by six-fold. Noninferiority trials assess whether a new treatment’s efficacy is comparable with that of the standard of care and have several appeals. Noninferiority trials can evaluate for both noninferiority and superiority of a new treatment. In addition, multiple treatment modalities exist, and new treatments may be advantageous for reasons beyond efficacy. Common elements of trial design such as the research question, outcomes, statistical analysis, and interpretation of results differ meaningfully between noninferiority trials and superiority trials.
- When making treatment decisions, it is often necessary to consider the relative efficacy and safety of multiple potential interventions. Unlike traditional pairwise meta-analysis, which allows for a comparison between two interventions by pooling head-to-head data, network meta-analysis (NMA) allows for the simultaneous comparison of more than two interventions and for comparisons to be made between interventions that have not been directly compared in a randomized controlled trial. Given these advantages, NMAs are being published in the medical literature with increasing frequency.
- Systematic reviews are increasingly utilized in the medical literature to summarize available evidence on a research question. Like other studies, systematic reviews are at risk for bias from a number of sources. A systematic review should be based on a formal protocol developed and made publicly available before the conduct of the review; deviations from a protocol with selective presentation of data can result in reporting bias. Evidence selection bias occurs when a systematic review does not identify all available data on a topic.