Randomized Controlled Trails

Some benefits of conducting randomized controlled trails are that they can provide the slightest biased estimates of comparative effectiveness (Dreyer et al., 2010). Also, randomized controlled trails are excellent at determining whether a new drug should be approved for marketing, because they most effectively control for diagnostic and prognostic factors that affect treatment decisions (Dreyer et al., 2010). According to the article, randomized controlled trails are helpful in defining the value of a particular treatment in complex, multi-therapy treatment (Dreyer et al., 2010). This is an important benefit, because it helps identify the significance of a treatment alternative. These trails helped clarify the proper dosing, timing of administration, and impact of clopidogrel (Dreyer et al., 2010).

4. Observational studies have a significant role in CER for the reason that they can address issues that are otherwise difficult or impossible to
study (Dreyer et al., 2010). Besides, observational studies are often necessary to answer important questions about particular populations and conditions (Dreyer et al., 2010).

4a. The reluctance of using observational studies is decision making apart from perceived methodological challenges (Dreyer et al., 2010). Broadly speaking, bias and confounding may lead to invalid results (Dreyer et al., 2010). Until now, observational studies are more prone to bias (Dreyer et al., 2010). Despite the fact that careful design and analysis can often minimize the impact of bias and confounding on the findings, these studies are still subjected to more bias. For example, when patients with certain prognostic factors are more likely to receive a new treatment, this introduces a bias (Dreyer et al., 2010). Since these factors are systematically affected the chance that patients will receive a particular treatment as well as the chance that they will benefit from it (Dreyer et al., 2010).

4b.
Observational studies are useful for numerous of things. Observational studies are useful for examining multiple treatment paradigms simultaneously (Dreyer et al., 2010). Next, observational studies are best used to assess the real-world applicability of evidence derived largely through randomized trials (Dreyer et al., 2010). Also, observational studies can provide useful evidence when trails have not been or cannot be performed (Dreyer et al., 2010). Some examples are when it would be politically or ethically unacceptable to deny access to interventions, as in the case of vaccines in a face of a threat of an influenza pandemic (Dreyer et al., 2010). Moreover, observational studies can be useful when larger studies are needed to understand the real-world benefits of different dosing and routes of administering a drug (Dreyer et al., 2010). Observational studies can be useful when patients’ adherence to treatment differs, when providers have different training, and when treatments are off-label (Dreyer et al.,
2010).