Prospektive, kontrollierte Studien in der Chirurgie. Kontroverse Standpunkte zur Motivierung und Durchführung [Prospective controlled clinical trials in surgery. Controversial issues in motivation and performance (author's transl)]

URN to cite this document:

urn:nbn:de:bvb:355-epub-218688 Copy

DOI to cite this document:

10.5283/epub.21868 Copy

Lorenz, Wilfried ; Rohde, H.

Preview

PDF (1MB)

Date of publication of this fulltext: 23 Aug 2011 06:28

---

Alternative links to fulltext:Pubmed

---

Details

Item type:	Article
Journal or Publication Title:	Klinische Wochenschrift
Publisher:	Springer
Volume:	57
Number of Issue or Book Chapter:	7
Page Range:	pp. 301-310
Date:	1979
Institutions:	Medicine > Zentren des Universitätsklinikums Regensburg > Tumorzentrum e.V.
Identification Number:	Value Type 374855 PubMed ID
Classification:	Notation Type Ethics, Medical MESH Evaluation Studies as Topic MESH Germany, West MESH Humans MESH Motivation MESH Patient Care Planning MESH Prospective Studies MESH Sampling Studies MESH Surgical Procedures, Operative/standards MESH
Dewey Decimal Classification:	600 Technology > 610 Medical sciences Medicine
Status:	Published
Refereed:	Yes, this version has been refereed
Created at the University of Regensburg:	Unknown
Item ID:	21868

Preview

Export bibliographical data

ASCII CitationAtomBibTeXData Cite XMLDataCite XML OAIDublin CoreEndNoteHTML CitationJSON LDMETSMODSOpenAPCRDF+N-TriplesRDF+N3RDF+XMLReferReference ManagerSimple MetadataXMLxMetaDissPlus

---

Abstract

Controversial aspects in prospective controlled trials in surgery can be detected at various stages in the course of this research work, such as in motivation, planning and performance as well as in assessment and evaluation of the results. Especially the introduction of control groups, randomization and "blindness" of patients, operators and doctors running the follow-up are subjects of a ...

Abstract

Controversial aspects in prospective controlled trials in surgery can be detected at various stages in the course of this research work, such as in motivation, planning and performance as well as in assessment and evaluation of the results. Especially the introduction of control groups, randomization and "blindness" of patients, operators and doctors running the follow-up are subjects of a controversial discussion. Subthreshold arguments for defenders and eniers of the trial are taken from different theories of science, such as empirism and rationalism which are more effective in the daily routine work than expected. Provided that convincingly only therapeutic and diagnostic procedures are compared which were considered as equi-effective and reliable to the same extent according to the best and most complete knowledge available it is ethically justified to perform controlled randomized trials. It should, however, not be expected that they (always) produce differences between treatment of high degree of difference. The aim of the controlled trials is not the introduction of sensational novelties into medicine, but the abolition and prevention of unnecessary and unworthy modes.

---

---

Metadata last modified: 26 Nov 2020 06:11

Owner only: item control page

Download Statistics

Download Statistics

Download Statistics

Download Statistics

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Altmetric

Altmetric

Altmetric

Alternative Statistics (altmetrics)

More literature (via CORE)

More literature (via CORE)

More literature (via CORE)

More literature (via CORE)