Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Montrer: 20 | 50 | 100
Résultats 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrer
Plus de filtres











Base de données
Gamme d'année
1.
Nuklearmedizin ; 49(1): 1-5, 2010.
Article de Allemand | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20087535

RÉSUMÉ

The call by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) to prove the patient-relevant benefit of positron emission tomography (PET) is currently a controversial topic in Germany. From a methodological point of view there is essentially no difference between diagnostic procedures and therapeutic (drug or non-drug) interventions in proving their causal benefit. A broad consensus has been reached since the 1960s (e.g. FDA regulations) that RCTs are the methodological gold standard for therapeutic interventions. Nevertheless, the same arguments that were cited against RCTs in assessing the benefit of therapeutic interventions are now used against RCTs in evaluating diagnostic tests (e.g. ethical problems, feasibility, etc.). This paper summarizes the central methodological arguments of the discussion on the benefit assessment of PET in malignant lymphomas from the perspective of IQWiG and its external experts.


Sujet(s)
Lymphomes/imagerie diagnostique , Tomographie par émission de positons/normes , Appréciation des risques , Médecine factuelle/normes , Allemagne , Humains , Tomographie par émission de positons/effets indésirables , Tomographie par émission de positons/méthodes , Assurance de la qualité des soins de santé , Radiographie , Essais contrôlés randomisés comme sujet
2.
Ophthalmologe ; 107(3): 235-40, 2010 Mar.
Article de Allemand | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20024566

RÉSUMÉ

Considering patients' values and preferences in comparative effectiveness research (CER) is one of the main challenges in ophthalmology (value-based medicine). This article defines core terms in CER. The concept of patient-relevant (or patient-important) outcomes is distinguished from patient-reported outcomes (PRO) by means of examples in the field of ophthalmology. In order to be able to give a consistant recommendation if an intervention leads to conflicting results for different outcomes (trade-off), a ranking of outcomes will be necessary. Examples of studies in glaucoma patients are provided that demonstrate the possibilities of ranking of outcomes based on patient preferences.


Sujet(s)
Programmes nationaux de santé/économie , Ophtalmologie/économie , Satisfaction des patients/économie , Échelles de valeur relative , Recherche comparative sur l'efficacité , Analyse coût-bénéfice/économie , Médecine factuelle/économie , Allemagne , Glaucome/économie , Glaucome/thérapie , Humains , Qualité de vie
SÉLECTION CITATIONS
DÉTAIL DE RECHERCHE