I would be most grateful if anyone could offer me some help on the
following:
I am a part-time PhD student trying to get my protocol for a primary care
clinical trial watertight (well, as much as possible)
The trial is multicentred, randomised and involves dentists providing
treatment for children. The children will act as their own controls as the
trial will be "split-mouth" with matched lesions being treated with
"standard" technique or the new technique. The problem is that the
"standard" technique actually involves a variety of techniques (in reality
about 6). Is it OK to compare one new technique to what is considered to be
standard practice by dentists across Scotland even though it involves more
than one technique??? There is no evidence to support any one of the
"standard" techniques as actually being more effective than any other.
The outcome measures are mainly pain/ abscess and such.
Thanks
Nicola
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com
|