Abstract
Research is a cornerstone of evidence based practice with the randomised controlled trial (RCT) regarded as the 'gold standard' for evaluating the effectiveness of interventions. However, it is not uncommon for RCT's to arrive at conflicting conclusions. This conflict might be explained by the quality of the different studies and their inherent risk of bias. Despite this, discussion and debate around methodological issues is limited in physiotherapy specific journals. It is important that clinicians are aware of the inherent risk of bias within studies and what this means for their practice. Hence, this paper presents a clinically focused methodological discussion with the intention of offering a platform upon which readers can develop their understanding of meaningful critical appraisal and hence gain confidence when reading and appraising published RCT's.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 614-617 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Journal | Manual Therapy |
| Volume | 16 |
| Issue number | 6 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Dec 2011 |
Keywords
- Continuing professional development
- Evidence based practice
- Randomised controlled trial
- Research methodology
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The RCT means nothing to me!'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver