TwiC or treat? Are trials within cohorts ethically defensible?
- PMID: 29250989
- PMCID: PMC5802521
- DOI: 10.1177/1740774517746622
TwiC or treat? Are trials within cohorts ethically defensible?
Conflict of interest statement
Comment in
-
Rejoinder.Clin Trials. 2018 Feb;15(1):25-26. doi: 10.1177/1740774517746638. Epub 2017 Dec 7. Clin Trials. 2018. PMID: 29214850 No abstract available.
-
Rejoinder.Clin Trials. 2018 Feb;15(1):27-28. doi: 10.1177/1740774517746629. Clin Trials. 2018. PMID: 29400564 No abstract available.
Comment on
-
Just-in-time consent: The ethical case for an alternative to traditional informed consent in randomized trials comparing an experimental intervention with usual care.Clin Trials. 2018 Feb;15(1):3-8. doi: 10.1177/1740774517746610. Epub 2017 Dec 11. Clin Trials. 2018. PMID: 29224379 Free PMC article.
-
Ethics and practice of Trials within Cohorts: An emerging pragmatic trial design.Clin Trials. 2018 Feb;15(1):9-16. doi: 10.1177/1740774517746620. Epub 2017 Dec 11. Clin Trials. 2018. PMID: 29224380 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Ford I, Norrie J. Pragmatic trials. N Engl J Med 2016; 375: 454–463. - PubMed
-
- Relton C, Torgerson D, O’Cathain A, et al. Rethinking pragmatic randomised controlled trials: introducing the “cohort multiple randomised controlled trial” design. BMJ 2010; 340: c1066. - PubMed
-
- Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences (CIOMS). International ethical guidelines for health-related research involving humans, https://cioms.ch/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/WEB-CIOMS-EthicalGuidelines.pdf (2016, accessed 6 September 2017).
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
