PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

T C Chalmers

Publications and source records attributed to T C Chalmers.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1999

Are randomized control trial outcomes influenced by the inclusion of a placebo group?: a systematic review of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug trials for arthritis treatment.

Placebo groups are often included in randomized control trials evaluating drug therapy, yet we know little about the placebo effect. The purpose of our study was to evaluate how the presence of a placebo group in a randomized control trial (RCT) influences the patients' ratings of the efficacy of an active drug therapy and their reporting of its adverse effects. We identified studies published between 1966 and 1994 using MEDLINE. Randomized control trials evaluating acetylsalicylic acid, diclofenac, or indomethacin for the treatment of osteo or rheumatoid arthritis were included in our sample. Two investigators independently extracted data. Fifty-eight treatment arms met our inclusion criteria and were available for analysis. Twenty-five treatment arms evaluated a nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) in placebo control trials and 33 in comparative trials. Using a logistic regression model to adjust for the differences between the evaluated drugs and between the types of arthritis, we found that patients receiving an NSAID in a placebo control trial were more likely to withdraw due to inefficacy (OR=1.3; 95% CI, 1.0 to 1.6; P=0.04). Using a similar model, withdrawals due to adverse effects were found to be more common when the NSAID was given in trials that did not include a placebo group (OR=1.5; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.9; P=0.002) as were reports of cutaneous (OR=4.2; 95% CI, 1.7 to 9.9), gastrointestinal (OR=1.6; 95% CI, 1.3 to 2.0), and other types (OR=5.3; 95% CI, 3.8 to 7.4) of adverse effects. Although reports of central nervous system adverse effects were more frequent in the comparative trials, this difference was not significant. Including a placebo group in a RCT changes how patients rate the efficacy and adverse effects of their therapy. Our results highlight the need to consider the placebo effect in the design and analyses of clinical trials.

Aged↗
PubMed1999

Omeprazole plus antibiotics in the eradication of Helicobacter pylori infection: a meta-regression analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

This article presents a meta-regression analysis of published studies of omeprazole plus antibiotics (amoxicillin, clarithromycin, or an imidazole derivative) in the treatment of Helicobacter pylori. Eligible studies were all randomized, controlled trials published through April 1996 with 10 or more patients receiving omeprazole plus antibiotics for 5 or more days and testing for H. pylori eradication 4 weeks or more after treatment. Probability of eradication was calculated for each treatment arm, and logistic regression was performed using study characteristics as covariates. Seventy-four studies involving 117 treatment arms with 4,769 patients were identified. The eradication rate was 76% for omeprazole plus clarithromycin and 65% for omeprazole plus amoxicillin dual regimens (P <.0001). Eradication rates for triple regimens were 82%, omeprazole plus amoxicillin plus clarithromycin; 83%, omeprazole plus amoxicillin plus imidazole; and 89%, omeprazole plus clarithromycin plus imidazole. In a multiple logistic regression analysis, significant factors were antibiotic, disease, omeprazole dose, and whether treatment was followed by maintenance omeprazole. A systematic overview of the best available evidence suggests that dual therapy with omeprazole plus clarithromycin is superior to omeprazole plus amoxicillin. Triple therapy is better than dual therapy. Treatment works better on ulcers than on nonulcer dyspepsia. Higher doses of omeprazole give better results. Additional trials exploring higher omeprazole doses for varying durations as well as cost, side effects, and compliance trade-offs with efficacy are recommended.

Anti-Bacterial Agents↗
PubMed1999

Safety of nifedipine in angina pectoris: a meta-analysis.

-Our objective was to compare cardiovascular event rates in patients with stable angina receiving nifedipine as monotherapy or combination therapy and in active drug controls. A MEDLARS search of published articles from 1966 to 1995 in English, French, German, Italian, or Spanish, supplemented by a manual search of bibliographies, identified 60 randomized controlled trials that met protocol criteria. Blinded articles were extracted by 2 physicians. The pooled risks of death, withdrawal, and cardiovascular event were computed and expressed as odds ratios (ORs) for all nifedipine formulations and relative to same study control drug regimens. Thirty cardiovascular events were reported in 2635 nifedipine exposures (1.14%) and 19 events in 2655 other active drug exposures (0.72%). Unadjusted ORs for nifedipine versus controls were 1.40 (95% CI, 0.56 to 3.49) for major events (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization procedure), 1.75 (95% CI, 0.83 to 3.67) for increased angina, and 1.61 (95% CI, 0.91 to 2.87) for all events (major events plus increased angina). Episodes of increased angina were more frequent on immediate-release nifedipine (OR, 4.19 [95% CI, 1.41 to 12.49]) and on nifedipine monotherapy (OR, 2.61 [95% CI, 1.30 to 5.26]). The OR for immediate-release nifedipine was significantly higher than that for sustained-release/extended-release nifedipine (P=0.001), and the OR for nifedipine monotherapy was higher than that for nifedipine combination therapy (P=0.03). Increased risks of cardiovascular events in patients with stable angina on nifedipine were due primarily to more episodes of increased angina, confined to the immediate-release formulation and to nifedipine monotherapy.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1998

The comparative effects of postoperative analgesic therapies on pulmonary outcome: cumulative meta-analyses of randomized, controlled trials.

UNLABELLED: We performed meta-analyses of randomized, control trials to assess the effects of seven analgesic therapies on postoperative pulmonary function after a variety of procedures: epidural opioid, epidural local anesthetic, epidural opioid with local anesthetic, thoracic versus lumbar epidural opioid, intercostal nerve block, wound infiltration with local anesthetic, and intrapleural local anesthetic. Measures of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), vital capacity (VC), peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), PaO2, and incidence of atelectasis, pulmonary infection, and pulmonary complications overall were analyzed. Compared with systemic opioids, epidural opioids decreased the incidence of atelectasis (risk ratio [RR] 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.85) and had a weak tendency to reduce the incidence of pulmonary infections (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.18-1.53) and pulmonary complications overall (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20-1.33). Epidural local anesthetics increased PaO2 (difference 4.56 mm Hg, 95% CI 0.058-9.075) and decreased the incidence of pulmonary infections (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.21-0.65) and pulmonary complications overall (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42-0.80) compared with systemic opioids. Intercostal nerve blockade tends to improve pulmonary outcome measures (incidence of atelectasis: RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.27-1.57, incidence of pulmonary complications overall: RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.18-1.22), but these differences did not achieve statistical significance. There were no clinically or statistically significant differences in the surrogate measures of pulmonary function (FEV1, FVC, and PEFR). These analyses support the utility of epidural analgesia for reducing postoperative pulmonary morbidity but do not support the use of surrogate measures of pulmonary outcome as predictors or determinants of pulmonary morbidity in postoperative patients. IMPLICATIONS: When individual trials are unable to produce significant results, it is often because of insufficient patient numbers. It may be impossible for a single institution to study enough patients. Meta-analysis is a useful tool for combining the data from multiple trials to increase the patient numbers. These meta-analyses confirm that postoperative epidural pain control can significantly decrease the incidence of pulmonary morbidity.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed1997

Safety of nifedipine in patients with hypertension: a meta-analysis.

Our objective was to compare cardiovascular event rates in patients with mild or moderate hypertension who received nifedipine with active drug controls. We performed a MEDLARS search using the MeSH heading "hypertension" and the text word "nifedipine" to identify all articles that were published between 1966 and August 1995 in English, French, German, Italian, and Spanish languages and that involved human subjects. The computerized search was supplemented by a manual search of article bibliographies. Review of 1880 citations revealed 98 randomized controlled clinical trials that met protocol criteria. Articles were extracted independently by two doctors who were blinded for author, institution, and treatment regimen, using a structured, pretested extraction form. Differences of opinion were resolved by consensus. Fourteen events occurred in 5198 exposures (0.27%) to nifedipine and 24 events in 5402 exposures (0.44%) to other active drug controls. Unadjusted odds ratios for nifedipine versus controls were 0.49 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.22-1.09) for definitive events (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke, revascularization procedure) and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.31-1.17) for all events (definitive plus increased angina). The odds ratio for nifedipine monotherapy (sustained- or extended-release in 91% of exposures) was nonsignificantly higher for definitive and all events (odds ratio, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.49-4.03 and odds ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 0.59-3.32, respectively). The odds ratio for nifedipine in combination with another drug was significantly lower for definitive and all events (odds ratio, 0.09; 95% CI, 0.01-0.66 and odds ratio, 0.15; 95% CI, 0.03-0.65, respectively). Differences in odds ratio for nifedipine monotherapy and combined therapy were statistically significant (P=.02 for definitive events and P=.001 for all events). Results support the safety of sustained- and extended-release nifedipine in the treatment of mild or moderate hypertension when it is used in combination with other drugs.

Adrenergic beta-Antagonists↗
PubMed1996

Changes in clinical trials mandated by the advent of meta-analysis.

Service on the Data Monitoring Committee of the CPEP (Calcium for Pre-eclampsia Prevention) has led us to four conclusions about clinical trials which we should like to present to this gathering of biostatisticians for their reactions: (i) meta-analyses of the pertinent published trials of the same therapy should always be undertaken before the start of a new trial, and the results examined to help determine the design of a new trial or determine if a trial should be undertaken at all; (ii) assuming that a decision is made to go ahead, the results of the past trials should be used in sizing the new one; (iii) in the course of the new one, regardless of the size estimates, stopping early should be considered if the trends conform to the results of the meta-analysis; and (iv) heterogeneity of patients entering clinical trials is desirable and should be specifically studied, and it should never be concluded that an average outcome is applicable to all future patients.

Calcium↗
PubMed1996

The effect of dietary protein restriction on the progression of diabetic and nondiabetic renal diseases: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Dietary protein has long been thought to play a role in the progression of chronic renal disease, but clinical trials to date have not consistently shown that dietary protein restriction is beneficial. PURPOSE: To use meta-analysis to assess the efficacy of dietary protein restriction in previously published studies of diabetic and nondiabetic renal diseases, including the recently completed Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study. DATA SOURCES: The English-language medical literature published from January 1966 through December 1994 was searched for studies examining the effect of low-protein diets in humans with chronic renal disease. A total of 1413 patients in five studies on nondiabetic renal disease (mean length of follow-up, 18 to 36 months) and 108 patients in five studies of type I diabetes mellitus (mean length of follow-up, 9 to 35 months) were included. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized, controlled studies were selected for nondiabetic renal disease; randomized, controlled studies or time-controlled studies with nonrandomized crossover design were selected for diabetic nephropathy. DATA EXTRACTION: Data in tables, figures, or text were independently extracted by two of the authors. DATA SYNTHESIS: The relative risk for progression of renal disease in patients receiving a low-protein diet compared with patients receiving a usual-protein diet was calculated by using a random-effects model. In five studies of nondiabetic renal disease, a low-protein diet significantly reduced the risk for renal failure or death (relative risk, 0.67 [95% Cl, 0.50 to 0.89]). In five studies of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus, a low-protein diet significantly slowed the increase in urinary albumin level or the decline in glomerular filtration rate or creatinine clearance (relative risk, 0.56 [Cl, 0.40 to 0.77]). Tests for heterogeneity showed no significant differences in relative risk among studies of either diabetic or nondiabetic renal disease. No significant differences were seen between diet groups in pooled mean arterial blood pressure (diabetic and nondiabetic patients) or glycosylated hemoglobin level (diabetic patients only). CONCLUSION: Dietary protein restriction effectively slows the progression of both diabetic and nondiabetic renal diseases.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Functional electrostimulation in poststroke rehabilitation: a meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of functional electrical stimulation (FES) in the rehabilitation of hemiparesis in stroke. DESIGN: A meta-analysis combined the reported randomized controlled trials of FES in stroke, using the effect size method of Glass, and the DerSimonian-Laird Random Effects Method for pooling studies. SETTING: The included studies were published between 1978 and 1992. They were conducted in academic rehabilitation medicine settings. PATIENTS: In all included studies, patients were in poststroke rehabilitation. The mean time after stroke varied from 1.5 to 29.2 months. INTERVENTION: FES applied to a muscle or associated nerve in a hemiparetic extremity was compared to No FES. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Change in paretic muscle force of contraction following FES was compared to change without FES. RESULTS: For the four included studies, the mean effect size was .63 (95% CI: .29, .98). This result was statistically significant (p < .05). CONCLUSION: Pooling from randomized trials supports FES as promoting recovery of muscle strength after stroke. This effect is statistically significant. There is a reasonable likelihood of clinical significance as well.

Aged↗
PubMed1996

Gender-based mortality follow-up from the Program on the Surgical Control of the Hyperlipidemias (POSCH) and meta-analysis of lipid intervention trials. Women in POSCH and other lipid trials.

OBJECTIVE: The authors assessed the clinical results of lipid-lowering therapy in women. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: The Program on the Surgical Control of the Hyperlipidemias (POSCH) has demonstrated that effective lowering of total cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in a postmyocardial infarction population significantly reduces atherosclerotic coronary heart disease (ACHD) mortality, ACHD mortality combined with a new confirmed nonfatal myocardial infarction, and the number of coronary artery bypass grafting and angioplasty procedures performed. METHODS: A review and meta-analysis were performed of the seven primary or secondary lipid/ atherosclerosis intervention trials-including POSCH-published in the English-language literature that included women and published results in women separate from the results in men or in the entire trial population. The main outcome measure analyzed was overall mortality. RESULTS: The Scottish Physicians Clofibrate Study, the Newcastle upon Tyne Clofibrate Study, and the Pravastatin Limitation of Atherosclerosis in the Coronary Arteries (PLAC I) Trial may have demonstrated a possible benefit in ACHD prognosis from effective lipid intervention in women. The other four available trials did not. The Minnesota Coronary Survey reported a 15.6% increase in overall mortality rate and a 30.6% increase in a combined cardiovascular endpoint rate in the lipid-intervention group. The Upjohn Colestipol Study demonstrated statistically significant reductions in overall and ACHD mortality in the men, but not in the women. The Scandinavian.

Cholesterol↗
PubMed1996

Searching for signals: mortality and cardiovascular events in published randomized control trials of nifedipine in ischemic heart disease and hypertension.

UNLABELLED: META-ANALYSIS: A meta-analysis of published randomized control trials of nifedipine in hypertension and stable angina pectoris was performed. RESULTS: The results suggest a formulation-dependent increased risk of mortality and adverse cardiovascular outcomes for monotherapy use in patients with stable angina pectoris. No increased risk was seen in the hypertension studies.

Humans↗
PubMed1995

Early or deferred zidovudine therapy in HIV-infected patients without an AIDS-defining illness.

PURPOSE: To do a meta-analysis on the efficacy of early or deferred zidovudine monotherapy in patients with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection but not the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). DATA SOURCES: Articles on zidovudine monotherapy published through May 1994. STUDY SELECTION: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials addressing the efficacy of zidovudine monotherapy in HIV-infected persons without an AIDS-defining illness. DATA EXTRACTION: Progression to any primary trial end point; any clinical end point; and AIDS or death. Data were stratified according to disease stage at study entry and duration of follow-up (short-term, < 14 months; long-term, > 21 months). DATA SYNTHESIS: Early initiation of zidovudine therapy was of short-term benefit for all the end points evaluated (for example, the risk ratio for progression to any primary end point was 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.64). Long-term trials showed a marginally significant trend of decreased progression to any primary end point (risk ratio, 0.73; CI, 0.52 to 1.03). The trend was not significant for other end points. With further stratification according to disease stage, progression to AIDS or death in the short term was significantly decreased for both symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with CD4 cell counts of less than 500 x 10(6)/L (risk ratios, 0.26 [CI, 0.13 to 0.56] and 0.43 [CI, 0.30 to 0.64], respectively). A regression analysis indicated a larger relative benefit in short-term trials and symptomatic patients than in long-term trials and asymptomatic patients. CONCLUSIONS: Early initiation of zidovudine therapy offers a benefit that decreases over time. Symptomatic patients experience a larger benefit than asymptomatic patients. The implications beyond 3 years of follow-up remain unknown.

Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome↗
PubMed1995

Efficacy and safety of different aspirin dosages on vascular diseases in high-risk patients. A metaregression analysis.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy and safety of different aspirin dosages in trials with patients at increased risk of vascular disease. DATA SOURCES: Pertinent studies were selected using MEDLINE (1966 through 1992), weekly reviews of Current Contents (1970 through 1992), and references from review articles and editorials. STUDY SELECTION: Thirty-six randomized control trials of aspirin compared with another dosage of aspirin or with placebo. METHODS: The Mantel-Haenszel method of pooling odds ratios and metaregression involving log odds ratio (and the risk difference) on aspirin dosage, adjusting for the control rate and the mean length of follow up of the studies. RESULTS: For all patients and for subgroups of patients with previous vascular conditions, there was no relationship between dose and vascular events. For all patients, a dose-response relation was not found with gastrointestinal hemorrhages and hemorrhagic stroke, but was found with gastrointestinal symptoms and withdrawals from side effects. For every 25 mg/day increase in aspirin dosage, the odds ratio of gastrointestinal symptoms and withdrawals increased, respectively, by 0.87% (99% Cl, 0.18 to 1.57%) and 0.94% (99% Cl, 0.06 to 1.82%). The corresponding absolute risk increases were 0.58 and 0.78 per 1,000 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Direct and indirect comparisons of high-risk patients suggest no statistical differences in efficacy, gastrointestinal bleeds, and hemorrhagic strokes across aspirin dosages. These comparisons, however, suggest decreased risk of gastrointestinal symptoms and of withdrawals with lower doses of aspirin. More direct comparison studies are warranted that should contrast the benefits and risks to determine the net benefit.

Aspirin↗
PubMed1995

Cumulative meta-analysis of clinical trials builds evidence for exemplary medical care.

Cumulative meta-analysis of clinical trials (a Bayesian interpretation for accumulating evidence) will profoundly affect medical care by summarizing evidence in the assessment of technology innovations. Application of the technique to the randomized control trials (RCTs) of streptokinase treatment of acute myocardial infarction, reduction of peri-operative mortality by antibiotic prophylaxis, and prevention of death from bleeding peptic ulcers has revealed efficacy years before it was suspected by any other means. Arrangement of the trials according to event rate in the controls, effect sizes, quality of the trials or according to covariables of interest has supplied unique information. If carried out prospectively the technique supplies invaluable information regarding indications for another trial, the number of patients necessary to determine the validity of past trends, and the type of patients who might be benefitted. Careful examination in a cumulative manner of the prior trials can reduce the need for future large trials.

Bayes Theorem↗
PubMed1995

Validation of a meta-analysis: the effects of fish oil in rheumatoid arthritis.

The purpose of this study was to validate the results of a meta-analysis showing the efficacy of fish oil in rheumatoid arthritis with the results of a re-analysis of the complete primary data set. A Medline search yielded seven published papers. Three additional trials were found by contacting authorities in the field. Inclusion criteria included (1) a double-blind, placebo-controlled study, (2) use of at least one of seven predetermined outcome measures, (3) results reported for both placebo and treatment groups at baseline and follow-up, (4) randomization, and (5) parallel or cross-over design. Papers were scored for quality. Demographic and outcomes variables were collected. For the re-analysis of the primary data, the same variables were abstracted for the 395 individual patients randomized. The meta-analysis demonstrated that dietary fish oil supplementation for 3 months significantly reduced tender joint count (rate difference [RD] [95% CI] = -2.9 [-3.8 to -2.1] [p = 0.001]) and morning stiffness (RD [95% CI] = -25.9 [-44.3 to -7.5] [p < 0.01]) as compared with heterogeneous dietary control oils. The re-analysis of the primary data confirmed a significant reduction in tender joint count (p = 0.001) and in morning stiffness (p < 0.02) in the parallel analysis that ignored interaction terms. The analyses that included an interaction term between site and treatment again confirmed a significant reduction in tender joint count. The results for morning stiffness were similar to the meta-analysis, but did not quite reach statistical significance (p = 0.052-0.083). The relative improvements in the other outcome variables did not reach statistical significance. Use of fish oil improved the number of tender joints and duration of morning stiffness at 3 months as analyzed by both meta- and mega-analysis. The fuller mega-analysis confirmed the results of the meta-analysis. The advantages of mega-analysis were as follows: (1) the ability to analyze the homogeneity of the patient populations, (2) the ability to make clinically sensible adjustments in the form of the comparison, and (3) the ability to examine subsets of the data.

Arthritis, Rheumatoid↗
PubMed1995

Biofeedback therapy in poststroke rehabilitation: a meta-analysis of the randomized controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of biofeedback therapy in poststroke rehabilitation. DESIGN: A meta-analysis of the reported randomized control trials of biofeedback therapy in poststroke rehabilitation was performed. Data were analyzed using the effect size method and pooled using the Der Simonian-Laird Random Effects Model. Study quality was assessed according to the method of Chalmers. SETTING: All included studies were conducted in academically based rehabilitation settings. PATIENTS: Patients were in the rehabilitative phase of their illness. The timing of the intervention from the acute event did vary greatly between and within studies. INTERVENTION: Biofeedback therapy was applied to a paretic limb of patients in the study group. Both treatment and control groups received standard physical therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Change in range of motion of a joint of a paretic limb as a result of treatment was examined. This measure was chosen after the eligible studies were evaluated for combinable end points. RESULTS: A total of eight studies were included in the analysis. The mean effect size for change in lower extremity range of motion as a result of biofeedback therapy was 1.50 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.59, 3.59). For the upper extremity the effect size was 2.30 (95% CI: -1.06, 5.66). Both results were not significant at the p < .05 level. Statistical tests showed significant heterogeneity among studies, validating the use of the Random Effects Model. CONCLUSION: Results of pooling available randomized control trials do not support the efficacy of biofeedback in restoring the range of motion of hemiparetic joints. Nevertheless, because the calculated mean effect sizes were large, with associated wide confidence intervals, the possibility of a type II error masking an important clinical benefit needs to be considered in evaluating this result.

Arm↗