The strengths and weakness of the single trial Strengths

New treatments, or variations of older therapies, rarely represent a revolutionary departure from what has gone before. As progress is usually made in modest steps, evaluation in prospective randomized trials is needed. These studies, comparing a new treatment with a relevant control, may be able to highlight and quantify relatively subtle but important differences in outcome.

Randomization controls for selection biases. If undertaken carefully, it should ensure that both known and unknown confounding variables, such as age, sex, and additional medications, are evenly distributed between groups. Any differences in outcome should then be due to the treatment, or the intention to give the treatment (see below). In 1991, the World Health Organization stated that the randomized controlled trial, if feasible, is the most objective means of evaluating mental health interventions/1.)

Certainly, large well-conducted trials, with participants, interventions, and outcomes recognizable to those working in health services, are potent guides to clinical practice. Nevertheless, even when such trials exist, it is important to view them alongside all other comparable evidence. Should the large study affirm the findings of smaller trials the clinician can proceed with confidence. If there is a discrepancy then debate will be generated, which should clarify important issues relating to the participants, interventions, or outcomes measured or to the methods by which the trial was conducted.(2)

Break Free From Passive Aggression

Break Free From Passive Aggression

This guide is meant to be of use for anyone who is keen on developing a better understanding of PAB, to help/support concerned people to discover various methods for helping others, also, to serve passive aggressive people as a tool for self-help.

Get My Free Ebook


Post a comment