CommentPutting research into context—revisited
References (5)
- et al.
Putting clinical trials into context
Lancet
(2005) - et al.
Clinical trials should begin and end with systematic reviews of relevant evidence: 12 years and waiting
Lancet
(2010)
Cited by (32)
Completeness of clinical evidence citation in trial protocols: A cross-sectional analysis
2022, MedCitation Excerpt :Human protection policies require prospective ethical review of risks, benefits, and alternatives of study participation. To honor this mandate, various policies instruct investigators and sponsors to present a comprehensive account of evidence supporting a trial within study proposals.1–4 For clinical trials, such proposals typically take the form of protocols.
Epidemiology and development economics two sides of the same coin in impact evaluation
2022, Journal of Clinical EpidemiologyCitation Excerpt :Fourth, the practice of setting the findings of evaluations in the context of the totality of the related evidence (e.g., in systematic reviews) is something that both economists and epidemiologists could substantially improve on. According to research published in the Lancet and an accompanying editorial [23,24], the lack of integration of results of new trials into existing systematic reviews greatly diminishes both the scientific and ethical value of the trials. Evaluations conducted in economics and epidemiology on similar topics offer unique opportunities for advancing interdisciplinary science work of policy relevance.
Directing scientists away from potentially biased publications: the role of systematic reviews in health care
2021, Research PolicyCitation Excerpt :The importance of systematic reviews to inform primary research – e.g., to identify research gaps, as well as to generate knowledge – has been widely acknowledged in medical research (Clarke et al., 2010, Bunn et al., 2015). For example, the medical journal The Lancet officially asks authors for reports of new research to place the results into the context of the whole body of evidence (Clark and Horton, 2010). Prior works looking at the role of systematic reviews to inform primary research have considered issues such as how many citations reviews can attract, and whether new trials set their conclusions in the context of a systematic review (Clarke et al., 2010, Bunn et al., 2015).
Increasing value and reducing waste in stroke research
2017, The Lancet NeurologyCitation Excerpt :The Lancet has set an example by requiring, since 2005, clinical trials to be reported in the context of all the available evidence.101 Since 2010, the Lancet journals have also required authors of research papers to submit a “Research in context” panel detailing how they searched for previous research and what their findings mean in the context of the established evidence base.102 Since 2014, authors have also been requested to describe the added value of their research.103
Further emphasis on research in context
2014, The LancetA new network to promote evidence-based research
2014, The Lancet