Nutrition Users' Guides : RCTs Part 2 - structured guide for interpreting and applying study results from randomised controlled trials on therapy or prevention questions
Bala, Malgorzata M. (Jagiellonian University Medical College)
Agarwal, Arnav (McMaster University)
Alonso-Coello, Pablo (Institut de Recerca Sant Pau)
Guyatt, G.H. (McMaster University)
Johnston, Bradley C. (Texas A&M University)
Klatt, K.C. (University of California Berkeley)
Vernooij, R.W.M. (University Medical Centre Utrecht)
Steen, J.P. (University of Toronto)
Duque, T. (Cochrane Central Executive Team. Cochrane)
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Departament de Medicina

Fecha:	2024
Resumen:	This article continues from a prior commentary on evaluating the risk of bias in randomised controlled trials addressing nutritional interventions. Having provided a synopsis of the risk of bias issues, we now address how to understand trial results, including the interpretation of best estimates of effect and the corresponding precision (eg, 95% CIs), as well as the applicability of the evidence to patients based on their unique circumstances (eg, patients' values and preferences when trading off potential desirable and undesirable health outcomes and indicators (eg, cholesterol), and the potential burden and cost of an intervention). Authors can express the estimates of effect for health outcomes and indicators in relative terms (relative risks, relative risk reductions, OR or HRs)-measures that are generally consistent across populations-and absolute terms (risk differences)-measures that are more intuitive to clinicians and patients. CIs, the range in which the true effect plausibly lies, capture the precision of estimates. To apply results to patients, clinicians should consider the extent to which the study participants were similar to their patients, the extent to which the interventions evaluated in the study are applicable to their patients and if all patient-important outcomes of potential benefit and harm were reported. Subsequently, clinicians should consider the values and preferences of their patients with respect to the balance of the benefits, harms and burdens (and possibly the costs) when making decisions about dietary interventions.
Derechos:	Aquest document està subjecte a una llicència d'ús Creative Commons. Es permet la reproducció total o parcial, la distribució, la comunicació pública de l'obra i la creació d'obres derivades, sempre que no sigui amb finalitats comercials, i sempre que es reconegui l'autoria de l'obra original.
Lengua:	Anglès
Documento:	Article de revisió ; recerca ; Versió publicada
Materia:	Critical appraisal ; Dietary patterns ; Evidence based practice ; Medical education ; Nutritional treatment
Publicado en:	BMJ Nutrition, Prevention and Health, Vol. 7, Num. 2 (31 2024) , p. 415-425, ISSN 2516-5542

DOI: 10.1136/bmjnph-2023-000834
PMID: 39882290

11 p, 1.3 MB

El registro aparece en las colecciones:
Documentos de investigación > Documentos de los grupos de investigación de la UAB > Centros y grupos de investigación (producción científica) > Ciencias de la salud y biociencias > Institut de Recerca Sant Pau
Artículos > Artículos de investigación
Artículos > Artículos publicados