Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Methodological comments: McFarlane et al.

Helena Chmura Kraemer1

  • 1Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University (Emerita), Palo Alto, CA hckhome@pacbell.net.

Schizophrenia Bulletin
|October 18, 2014
PubMed
Summary

The McFarlane et al study does not offer a practical trial model due to methodological issues. This review highlights these problems and proposes criteria for a future model.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Envisioning an improved research strategy for detecting moderators/mediators in intervention studies: A commentary on McClure et al.

The International journal of eating disorders·2024
Same author

Letter to the Editor: Caution warranted when interpreting registry studies of medication. A response to Boland et al. (2020).

Journal of psychiatric research·2022
Same author

Is It Time to Ban the P Value?

JAMA psychiatry·2019
Same author

When meta-analyses get it wrong: response to 'treatment outcomes for anorexia nervosa: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials'.

Psychological medicine·2018
Same author

"Evidence"-based medicine in eating disorders research: The problem of "confetti p values".

The International journal of eating disorders·2017
Same author

Multiple-Treatments Meta-Analysis: Are the Conclusions Supported by the Data?

Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology·2016

Area of Science:

  • Clinical research methodology
  • Trial design evaluation

Background:

  • The McFarlane et al study aimed to establish a model for practical clinical trials.
  • Concerns exist regarding the methodological rigor of the proposed model.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To critically review the methodological challenges in the McFarlane et al study.
  • To establish criteria for a robust model for practical clinical trials.

Main Methods:

  • Critical analysis of the McFarlane et al study's methodology.
  • Identification of specific methodological shortcomings.
  • Development of criteria for effective trial modeling.

Main Results:

  • The McFarlane et al study's methodology presents significant problems, rendering it unsuitable as a practical trial model.
  • Key areas for improvement include [specifics to be detailed in full text].

Conclusions:

  • The current study by McFarlane et al is not a viable model for practical trials.
  • Methodological criteria are proposed to guide the development of future, effective trial models.
Keywords:
criteriamethodologypractical trials

Related Experiment Videos