Evidence‐based medicine

  • 1  Bigby M, Corona R, Szklo M. Evidence‐based medicine. In: Goldsmith LA, Katz SI, Gilchrest BA, Paller A, Leffell DJ, Wolff K, eds. Fitzpatrick's Dermatology in General Medicine, 8th edn. Columbus, OH: McGraw‐Hill, 2012:915.
  • 2  Anonymous. Medical research council streptomycin in tuberculosis trials committee. Streptomycin treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis. BMJ 1948;ii:76982.
  • 3  Cochrane A. Effectiveness and Efficiency. Random Reflections on Health Services. London: Nuffield Provincial Hospital Trust, 1972.
  • 4  Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt GH, Tugwell P. Clinical Epidemiology: A Basic Science for Clinical Medicine. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1991.
  • 5  Evidence Based Medicine Working Group. Evidence‐based medicine a new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA 1992;268:24205. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 6  Sackett DL, Rosenberg WM, Gray JA, Haynes RB, Richardson WS. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ 1996;312:712. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 7  Chalmers I, Dickersin K, Chalmers TC. Getting to grips with Archie Cochrane's agenda. BMJ 1992;305:7868. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 8  Strauss SR, Sackett DL. Bringing evidence to the clinic. Arch Dermatol 1998;134:151920. Pubmed link
  • 9  Covell DG, Uman GC, Manning PR. Information needs in office practice: are they being met? Ann Intern Med 1985;103:5969. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 10  Arndt K. Information excess in medicine. Overview, relevance to dermatology, and strategies for coping. Arch Dermatol 1992;128:124956. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 11  Williams HC. Dowling Oration 2001. Evidence‐based dermatology 2 a bridge too far? Clin Exp Dermatol 2001;26:71424. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 12  Sterne JA, Egger M, Smith GD. Systematic reviews in health care: investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta‐analysis. BMJ 2001;323:101—5. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 13  Katz KA, Swetman GL. Imiquimod, molluscum, and the need for a better “Best Pharmaceuticals for Children” act. Pediatrics 2013;132:13. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 14  Bigby M, Stern RS, Bigby J. An evaluation of method reporting and use in clinical trials in dermatology. Arch Dermatol 1985;121:13949. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 15  Adetugbo K, Williams H. How well are randomized controlled trials reported in the dermatology literature? Arch Dermatol 2000;136:3815. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 16  Hu SW, Bigby M. Pityriasis versicolor: a systematic review of interventions. Arch Dermatol 2010;146:113240. Pubmed link
  • 17  Parker ER, Schilling LM, Diba V, Williams HC, Dellavalle RP. What is the point of databases of reviews for dermatology if all they compile is “insufficient evidence”? J Am Acad Dermatol 2004;50:6359. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 18  Lexchin J, Bero LA, Djulbegovic B, Clark O. Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review. BMJ 2003:326:116770. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 19  Boutron I, Dutton S, Ravaud P, Altman DG. Reporting and interpretation of randomized controlled trials with statistically nonsignificant results for primary outcomes. JAMA 2010;303:205864. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 20  Nankervis H, Baibergenova A, Williams HC, Thomas KS. Prospective registration and outcome‐reporting bias in randomized controlled trials of eczema treatments: a systematic review. J Invest Dermatol 2012;132:272734. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 21  Sackett DL. Surveys of self‐reported reading times of consultants in Oxford, Birmingham, Milton‐Keynes, Bristol, Leicester, and Glasgow. In: RosenbergWMC, RichardsonWS, HaynesRB, SackettDL, eds. Evidence‐based Medicine. London: Churchill Livingstone, 1997:120.

Formulating questions and finding evidence

  • 22  Rzany B, Bigby M. Formulating well built clinical questions. In: Williams HC, Bigby M, Diepgen T, Herxheimer A, Naldi L, Rzany B, eds. Evidence‐based Dermatology, 2nd edn. London: BMJ Books, 2009:2930.
  • 23  Guyatt G, Drummond R, Meade M, Cook D. The Evidence Based Medicine Working Group Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature, 2nd edn. Chicago: McGraw Hill, 2008:1728.
  • 24  Riva JJ, Malik KM, Burnie SJ, Endicott AR, Busse JW. What is your research question? An introduction to the PICOT format for clinicians. J Can Chiropr Assoc 2012;56:16771. Pubmed link
  • 25  Bigby M, Corona R, Szklo M. Evidence‐based Medicine. In: Goldsmith LA, Katz SI, Gilchrest BA, Paller A, Leffell DJ, Wolff K, eds. Fitzpatrick's Dermatology in General Medicine, 8th edn. Columbus, OH: McGraw‐Hill, 2012:915.
  • 26  Bigby M. Challenges to the hierarchy of evidence: does the emperor have no clothes? Arch Dermatol 2001;137:3456. Pubmed link
  • 27  Lau J, Antman EM, Jimenez‐Silva J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. Cumulative meta‐analysis of therapeutic trials for myocardial infarction [see comments]. N Eng J Med 1992;327:24854. Cross Ref link
  • 28  LeLorier J, Gregoire G, Benhaddad A, Lapierre J, Derderian F. Discrepancies between meta‐analyses and subsequent large randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med 1997;337:53642. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 29  Lau J, Ionnidis JPA, Schmid CH. Summing up evidence: one answer is not always enough. Lancet 1998;351:1237. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 30  Kunz R, Oxman AD. The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non‐randomised clinical trials. BMJ 1998;317:118590. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 31  Benson K, Hartz AJ. A comparison of observational studies and randomized, controlled trials. N Engl J Med 2000;342:187886. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 32  Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz R. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research design. N Engl J Med 2000;342:188792. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 33  Williams HC, Dellavalle RP. The growth of clinical trials and systematic reviews in informing dermatological patient care. J Invest Dermatol 2012;132:100817. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 34  Nisbett R, Ross L. Human Inference: Strategies and Shortcomings of Social Judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall, 1980.
  • 35  Bigby M. Paradigm lost. Arch Dermatol 2000;136:267. Pubmed link
  • 36  Wolkenstein P, Latarjet J, Roujeau JC, et al. Randomised comparison of thalidomide versus placebo in toxic epidermal necrolysis. Lancet 1998;352:15869. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 37  Collier A, Heilig L, Schilling L, Williams H, Dellavalle RP. Cochrane Skin Group systematic reviews are more methodologically rigorous than other systematic reviews in dermatology. Br J Dermatol 2006;155:12305. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 38  Reddi A, Prescott L, Doney E, et al. The Cochrane Skin Group: a vanguard for developing and promoting evidence‐based dermatology. J Evid Based Med 2013;6:23642. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 39  Adetugbo K, Williams H. How well are randomized controlled trials reported in the dermatology literature? Arch Dermatol 2000;136:3815. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 40  Spuls PI, Witkamp L, Bossuyt PM, Bos JD. A systematic review of five systemic treatments for severe psoriasis. Br J Dermatol 1997;137:9439. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 41  Greenhalgh T. How to Read a Paper: the Basics of Evidence Based Medicine, 5th edn. London: BMJ Publishing Group, 1997.
  • 42  Anders ME, Evans DP. Comparison of PubMed and Google Scholar Literature Searches. Respir Care 2010;55(5):57883. Pubmed link
  • 43  Schultz M. Comparing test searches in PubMed and Google Scholar J Med Libr Assoc 2007;95(4):4425. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 44  Freeman MK, Lauderdale SA, Kendrach MG, Woolley TW. Google Scholar versus PubMed in locating primary literature to answer drug‐related questions. Ann Pharmacother 2009;43(3):47884. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 45  Nankervis H, Maplethorpe A, Williams HC. Mapping randomised controlled trials of treatments for eczema – the GREAT database. BMC Dermatol 2011;11:10. Cross Ref link Pubmed link

Critically appraising evidence and applying it to individual patients

  • 46  Bigby M, Corona R, Szklo M. Evidence‐based medicine. In: Goldsmith LA, Katz SI, Gilchrest BA, Paller A, Leffell DJ, Wolff K, eds. Fitzpatrick's Dermatology in General Medicine, 8th edn. Columbus, OH: McGraw‐Hill, 2012:915.
  • 47  Bigby M. Understanding and evaluating systematic reviews. Indian J Dermatol 2014;59:1349. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 48  Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses: the PRISMA Statement. BMJ 2009;339:b2535. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 49  Egger M, Smith GD, Sterne JA. Uses and abuses of meta‐analysis. Clin Med 2001;1:47884. Cross Ref link
  • 50  HigginsJPT, GreenS, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011), www.handbook.cochrane.org (last accessed May 2014). Cross Ref link
  • 51  HigginsJPT, GreenS, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011), http://handbook.cochrane.org (last accessed May 2014). Cross Ref link
  • 52  Cochrane Collaboration. Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. http://ohg.cochrane.org/sites/ohg.cochrane.org/files/uploads/Risk%20of%20bias%20assessment%20tool.pdf (last accessed May 2014).
  • 53  Sterne JA, Egger M, Smith GD. Systematic reviews in health care: investigating and dealing with publication and other biases in meta‐analysis. BMJ 2001;323:1015. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 54  Dickersin K, Min YI, Meinert CL. Factors influencing publication of research results. Follow‐up of applications submitted to two institutional review boards. JAMA 1992;267:3748. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 55  Katz KA, Swetman GL. Imiquimod, molluscum, and the need for a better “best pharmaceuticals for children” act. Pediatrics 2013;132(1):13. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 56  Goldacre B. Bad science. http://www.badscience.net/category/publication‐bias/ (last accessed May 2014).
  • 57  Jorgensen AW, Hilden J, Gotzsche PC. Cochrane reviews compared with industry supported meta‐analyses and other meta‐analyses of the same drugs: systematic review. BMJ 2006;333:782. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 58  Collier A, Heilig L, Schilling L, Williams H, Dellavalle RP. Cochrane Skin Group systematic reviews are more methodologically rigorous than other systematic reviews in dermatology. Br J Dermatol 2006;155:12305. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 59  Olsen O, Middleton P, Ezzo J, et al. Quality of Cochrane reviews: assessment of sample from 1998. BMJ 2001;323:82932. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 60  Abuabara K, Freeman EE, Dellavalle R. The role of systematic reviews and meta‐analysis in dermatology. J Invest Dermatol 2012;132(11):e2. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 61  Schriger DL, Altman DG, Vetter JA, Heafner T, Moher D. Forest plots in reports of systematic reviews: a cross‐sectional study reviewing current practice. Int J Epidemiol 2010;39:4219. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 62  Katz KA. The (relative) risks of using odds ratios. Arch Dermatol 2006;142:7614. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 63  Centre for Evidence Based Medicine. Number needed to treat. http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=1044 (last accessed May 2014).
  • 64  StatTools.net. http://www.statstodo.com/RiskOddsConv_Pgm.php (last accessed May 2014).
  • 65  Manriquez JJ, Villouta MF, Williams HC. Evidence‐based dermatology: number needed to treat and its relation to other risk measures. J Am Acad Dermatol 2007;56:66471. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 66  HigginsJPT, GreenS, eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.1.0 (updated March 2011), chapter 9.5. www.handbook‐cochrane.org (last accessed May 2014). Cross Ref link
  • 67  Macaskill P, Walter SD, Irwig L. A comparison of methods to detect publication bias in meta‐analysis. Stat Med 2001;20:64154. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 68  Parker ER, Schilling LM, Diba V, Williams HC, Dellavalle RP. What is the point of databases of reviews for dermatology if all they compile is “insufficient evidence”? J Am Acad Dermatol 2004;50:6359. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 69  González U, Whitton M, Eleftheriadou V, Pinart M, Batchelor J, Leonardi‐Bee J. Guidelines for designing and reporting clinical trials in vitiligo. Arch Dermatol 2011;147:142836. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 70  Bigby M, Gadenne A‐S. Understanding and evaluating clinical trials. J Am Acad Dermatol 1996;34:55590. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 71  Williams HC. How to critically appraise a randomized controlled trial. In: Williams HC, Bigby M, Diepgen T, Herxheimer A, Naldi L, Rzany B, eds. Evidence‐based Dermatology, 2nd edn. London: BMJ Books, 2008:4451.
  • 72  Guillaume J‐C, Vaillant L, Bernard P, et al. Controlled trial of azathioprine and plasma exchange in addition to prednisolone in the treatment of bullous pemphigoid. Arch Dermatol 1993;129:4953. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 73  Kirtschig G, Middleton P, Bennett C, Murrell DF, Wojnarowska F, Khumalo NP. Interventions for bullous pemphigoid. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;Issue 10:CD002292 Pubmed link
  • 74  Fergusson D, Aaron SD, Guyatt G, Hebert P. Post‐randomisation exclusions: the intention to treat principle and excluding patients from analysis. BMJ 2002;325:6524. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 75  Allen AM. Clinical trials in dermatology. Part 3: Measuring responses to treatment. Int J of Dermatol 1980;19:16. Cross Ref link
  • 76  Fredriksson T, Pettersson U. Severe psoriasis‐oral therapy with a new retinoid. Dermatologica 1978;157:23844. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 77  Tiling‐Grosse S, Rees J. Assessment of area of involvement in skin disease: a study using schematic figure outlines. Br J Dermatol 1992;128:6974. Cross Ref link
  • 78  Schmitt J, Langan S, Stamm T, Williams H on behalf of the Harmonizing Outcome Measurements in Eczema (HOME) Delphi Panel. Core outcome domains for controlled trials and clinical recordkeeping in eczema: international multi‐perspective Delphi consensus process. J Invest Dermatol 2011;131:62330. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 79  Whitley R, Weiss H, Gann J, et al. Acyclovir with and without prednisone for the treatment of herpes zoster. Ann Intern Med 1996;125:37683. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 80  Freiman JA, Chalmers TC, Smith JH, Kuebler RR. The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized control trial. N Eng J Med 1978;299:6904. Cross Ref link
  • 81  Moher D, Dulberg CS, Wells GA. Statistical power, sample size, and their reporting in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1994;272:1224. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 82  Williams HC, Seed P. Inadequate size of ‘negative’ clinical trials in dermatology. Br J Dermatol 1993;128:31726. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 83  Bigby M. Ruling out the diagnosis. Arch Dermatol 1996;132:6978. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 84  Ferrante di Ruffano L, Hyde CJ, McCaffery KJ, Bossuyt PM, Deeks JJ. Assessing the value of diagnostic tests: a framework for designing and evaluating trials. BMJ 2012;344:e686. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 85  Dolman GE, Nieboer D, Steyerberg EW, et al. The performance of transient elastography compared to clinical acumen and routine tests – what is the incremental diagnostic value? Liver Int 2013;33:1729. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 86  Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative. BMJ 2003;326:414. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 87  Thygesen LC, Andersen GS, Andersen H. A philosophical analysis of the Hill criteria. J Epidemiol Community Health 2005;59:51216. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 88  Wolf P, Quehenberger F, Mullegger R, Stranz B, Kerl H. Phenotypic markers, sunlight‐related factors and sunscreen use in patients with cutaneous melanoma: an Austrian case–control study. Melanoma Res 1998;8:3708. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 89  Ashcroft DM, Dimmock P, Garside R, Stein K, Williams HC. Efficacy and tolerability of topical pimecrolimus and tacrolimus in the treatment of atopic dermatitis: meta‐analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 2005;330:51625. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 90  Sackett D, Richardson W, Rosenberg W, Haynes R. Evidence‐based Medicine: How to Practice and Teach EBM. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1996.

Evaluating the data in clinical research papers and a shortcut method for reading clinical research papers

  • 91  Bigby M, Gadenne A‐S. Understanding and evaluating clinical trials. J Am Acad Dermatol 1996;34:55590. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 92  Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses: the PRISMA Statement. BMJ 2009;339:b2535. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 93  Bland JM, Bland DG. Statistics notes: one and two sided tests of significance. BMJ 1994;309:248. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 94  Cunliffe WJ, Berth‐Jones J, Claudy A, et al. Comparative study of calcipotriol (MC 903) ointment and betamethasone 17‐valerate ointment in patients with psoriasis vulgaris. J Am Acad Dermatol 1992;26:73643. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 95  Gore SM, Jones IG, Rytter EC. Misuse of statistical methods: critical assessment of articles in BMJ from January to March 1976. BMJ 1977;1(6053):857. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 96  Glantz SA. Current topics biostatistics: how to detect, correct and prevent errors in the medical literature. Circulation 1980;61:17. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 97  Eypasch E, Lefering R, Kum CK, Troidl H. Probability of adverse events that have not yet occurred: a statistical reminder. BMJ 1995;311:61920. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 98  Freiman JA, Chalmers TC, Smith J, et al. The importance of beta, the Type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized control trial. N Eng J Med 1978;299:6904. Cross Ref link
  • 99  Moher D, Dulberg CS, Wells GA. Statistical power, sample size, and their reporting in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1994;272:1224. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 100  Moher D, Cook DJ, Eastwood S, Olkin I, Rennie D, Stroup DF. Improving the quality of reports of meta‐analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement. Quality of Reporting of Meta‐analyses. Lancet 1999;354:1896900. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 101  Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, et al. CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ 2010;340:c869. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 102  Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gotzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP; STROBE Initiative. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ 2007;335:8068. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 103  Murray GD. Statistical guidelines for the British Journal of Surgery. Br J Surg 1991;78:7824. Cross Ref link Pubmed link
  • 104  Williams HC, Naldi L, Paul C, Vahlquist A, Schroter S, Jobling R. Conflicts of interest in dermatology. Acta Derm Venereol 2006;86(6):48597. Cross Ref link Pubmed link