Literatur – 13. Aus den richtigen Gründen forschen: ein Entwurf für eine bessere Zukunft

1. Chalmers 1, Glasziou P. Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence. Lancet 2009; 374: 86–89.

2. Roberts I, Yates D, Sandercock P, et al; CRASH trial collaborators. Effect of intravenous corticosteroids on death within 14 days in 10008 adults with clinically significant head injury (MRC CRASH trial): randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2004; 364: 1321–1328.

3. Cochrane Injuries Group Albumin Reviewers. Human albumin administration in critically ill patients: systematic review of randomised controlled trials. BMJ 1998; 317: 235–240.

4. Finfer S, Bellomo R, Bryce N, et al (SAFE Study Investigators). A comparison of albumin and saline for fluid resuscitation in the intensive care unit. New England Journal of Medicine 2004; 350: 2247–2256.

5. Edwards A, Elwyn G, Atwell C, et al. Shared decision making and risk communication in general practice – a study incorporating systematic literature reviews, psychometric evaluation of outcome measures, and quantitative, qualitative and health economic analyses of a cluster randomised trial of professional skill development. Report to Health in Partnership programme, UK Department of Health. Cardiff: Department of General Practice. University of Wales College of Medicine, 2002.

6. Farrell C, ed. Patient and public involvement in health: The evidence for policy implementation. A summary of the results of the Health in Partnership research programme. London: Department of Health Publications, April 2004. Zugänglich unter:

7. Donovan J, Mills N, Smith M, et al for the ProtecT Study Group. Quality improvement report: improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (prostate testing for cancer and treatment) study. BMJ 2002; 325: 766–770.

8. Dickersin K, Chalmers I. Recognising, investigating and dealing with incomplete and biased reporting of clinical research: from Francis Bacon to the World Health Organization. James Lind Library, 2010 (www.

9. Chan A-W, Hróbjartsson A, Haahr MT, et al. Empirical evidence for selective reporting of outcomes in randomized trials: comparison of protocols to published articles. JAMA 2004; 291: 2457–2465.

10. Chan AW, Altman DG. Epidemiology and reporting of randomised trials published in PubMed journals. Lancet 2005; 365: 1159–1162.

11. Glasziou P, Meats E, Heneghan C, Shepperd S. What is missing from descriptions of treatment in trials and reviews? BMJ 2008; 336: 1472–1474.

12. Clarke M, Hopewell S, Chalmers I. Clinical trials should begin and end with systematic reviews of relevant evidence: 12 years and waiting. Lancet 2010; 376: 20–21.