I wonder if the tone of this discussion suggests that people are more
ready to believe some RCTs than others. I'm not specifically
defending this RCT since their outcome measure is a bit dubious, but
I suspect that if there were four identical RCTs with identical
good methods and identical results then we'd be more likely
to believe the results and more ready to be picky about the details
of the design for some rather than others eg
the effect of prayer
the effect of a homeopathic preparation
the effect of a herbal preparation
the effect of a pharmaceutical drug
Difference in the degree of plausibility we ascribe to each may
affect how we judge the quality of the method. But as others have
said, if the method is OK, then maybe it's our idea of plausibility
that is the problem. Isn't EBM meant to be about being open minded?
How much do our preconceptions govern how we judge the evidence?
Bruce
PS I still don't believe in the power of prayer and I'm glad the two
trials I've read have enough problems for me to say the evidence
supports my blind faith in the non existence of a god
Bruce Guthrie,
MRC Training Fellow in Health Services Research,
Department of General Practice,
University of Edinburgh,
20 West Richmond Street,
Edinburgh EH8 9DX
Tel 0131 650 9237
e-mail [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|