Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
4002231 | American Journal of Ophthalmology | 2014 | 7 Pages |
Abstract
The clinical objective commonly was stated, but the prospectively defined hypothesis tended to be understated in ophthalmic RCTs. Superiority was the most common type of comparison. Conclusions made in some of them with negative results were not consistent with the hypothesis, indicating that noninferiority or equivalence may be a more appropriate design. Flaws were common in the noninferiority and equivalence studies. Future ophthalmic researchers should choose the type of comparison carefully, specify the hypothesis clearly, and draw conclusions that are consistent with the hypothesis.
Related Topics
Health Sciences
Medicine and Dentistry
Ophthalmology
Authors
Chun Fan Lee, Andy Chi On Cheng, Daniel Yee Tak Fong,