Accès gratuit
Numéro
Therapie
Volume 65, Numéro 4, Juillet-Août 2010
Page(s) 329 - 334
Section Méthodologie / Methodology
DOI https://doi.org/10.2515/therapie/2010035
Publié en ligne 21 septembre 2010
  1. EU standard of medicinal product registration: clinical evaluation of risk/benefit – The role of comparator studies. Ref. EMEA/119319/04, October 2004 http://www.ema.europa.eu
  2. Van Luijn JCF, Gribnau FWJ, Leufkens HGM. Availability of comparative trials for the assessment of new medicines in the European Union at the moment of market authorization. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2006; 63: 159-62 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Chalkidou K, Tunis S, Lopert R, Comparative effectiveness research and evidence-based health policy: experience from four countries. The Milbank Quarterly 2009; 87: 339-67 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Clement FM, Harris A, Li JJ, Using effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to make drug coverage decisions: a comparison of Britain, Australia, and Canada. JAMA 2009; 302: 1437-43 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Marley J. Efficacy, effectiveness, efficiency. Aust Prescr 2000; 23: 114-5
  6. Chalmers I, Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet 2009; 374: 86-9 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Atkins D. Creating and synthesizing evidence with decision makers in mind. Med Care 2007; 45: S16-S22 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Mitka M. Studies comparing treatments ramp up. JAMA 2009; 301: 1975 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Berwick DM. The science of improvement. JAMA 2008; 299: 1182-4 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Dawson L, Zarin DA, Emanuel EJ, Considering usual medical care in clinical trial design. PLoS Med 2009; 6: 1-6 [PubMed]
  11. Rawlins M. Harveian Oration - De testimonio: on the evidence for decisions about the use of therapeutic interventions. Lancet 2008; 372: 2152–61 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. ICH topic E10. Choice of control group in clinical trials. Ref. CPMP/ICH/364/96, January 2001 http://www.ema.europa.eu
  13. Glickman SW, McHutchinson JG, Peterson ED, Ethical and scientific implications of the globalisation of clinical research. N Eng J Med 2009; 360: 816-23 [CrossRef]
  14. Luce BR, Kramer JM, Goodman SN, Rethinking randomized clinical trials for comparative effectiveness research: the need for transformational change. Ann Intern Med 2009; 151: 206-9 [PubMed]
  15. EMEA/CPMP position statement on the use of placebo in clinical trials with regard to the revised declaration of Helsinki. Ref. EMEA/17424/01, June 2001 http://www.ema.europa.eu
  16. Garattini S, Chalmers I. Patients and the public deserve big changes in evaluation of drugs. BMJ 2009; 338: 804-6 [CrossRef]
  17. Andersson RE, Petzold MG. Nonsurgical treatment of appendiceal abscess or phlegmon: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg 2007; 246: 741-8 [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. http://www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/scientificadvice/AboutScientificAdvice.jsp
  19. http://www.cadth.ca/index.php/en/cdr/filing-submission/pre-submission-meetings
  20. Table Ronde n°2 de Giens XXIII. Le bon usage du médicament : définition, référentiels, périmètre et champ d’application. Therapie 2008; 63: 267-73

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.