Browsing by Author "Sox, Harold C"

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    Making genomic medicine evidence-based and patient-centered: a structured review and landscape analysis of comparative effectiveness research.
    (Genet Med, 2017-04-13) Phillips, Kathryn A; Deverka, Patricia A; Sox, Harold C; Khoury, Muin J; Sandy, Lewis G; Ginsburg, Geoffrey S; Tunis, Sean R; Orlando, Lori A; Douglas, Michael P
    Comparative effectiveness research (CER) in genomic medicine (GM) measures the clinical utility of using genomic information to guide clinical care in comparison to appropriate alternatives. We summarized findings of high-quality systematic reviews that compared the analytic and clinical validity and clinical utility of GM tests. We focused on clinical utility findings to summarize CER-derived evidence about GM and identify evidence gaps and future research needs. We abstracted key elements of study design, GM interventions, results, and study quality ratings from 21 systematic reviews published in 2010 through 2015. More than half (N = 13) of the reviews were of cancer-related tests. All reviews identified potentially important clinical applications of the GM interventions, but most had significant methodological weaknesses that largely precluded any conclusions about clinical utility. Twelve reviews discussed the importance of patient-centered outcomes, although few described evidence about the impact of genomic medicine on these outcomes. In summary, we found a very limited body of evidence about the effect of using genomic tests on health outcomes and many evidence gaps for CER to address.Genet Med advance online publication 13 April 2017Genetics in Medicine (2017); doi:10.1038/gim.2017.21.
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemOpen Access
    SPIRIT 2013 statement: defining standard protocol items for clinical trials.
    (Ann Intern Med, 2013-02-05) Chan, An-Wen; Tetzlaff, Jennifer M; Altman, Douglas G; Laupacis, Andreas; Gøtzsche, Peter C; Krleža-Jerić, Karmela; Hróbjartsson, Asbjørn; Mann, Howard; Dickersin, Kay; Berlin, Jesse A; Doré, Caroline J; Parulekar, Wendy R; Summerskill, William SM; Groves, Trish; Schulz, Kenneth F; Sox, Harold C; Rockhold, Frank W; Rennie, Drummond; Moher, David
    The protocol of a clinical trial serves as the foundation for study planning, conduct, reporting, and appraisal. However, trial protocols and existing protocol guidelines vary greatly in content and quality. This article describes the systematic development and scope of SPIRIT (Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials) 2013, a guideline for the minimum content of a clinical trial protocol.The 33-item SPIRIT checklist applies to protocols for all clinical trials and focuses on content rather than format. The checklist recommends a full description of what is planned; it does not prescribe how to design or conduct a trial. By providing guidance for key content, the SPIRIT recommendations aim to facilitate the drafting of high-quality protocols. Adherence to SPIRIT would also enhance the transparency and completeness of trial protocols for the benefit of investigators, trial participants, patients, sponsors, funders, research ethics committees or institutional review boards, peer reviewers, journals, trial registries, policymakers, regulators, and other key stakeholders.