<International Circulation>: Which is better – the registry studies or the clinical trials?
   《国际循环》：注册研究和临床试验，哪一个更好？
    Prof.Harrington: We should not think of registries and clinical trials as competitive with each other， but rather as complementary. Each of them has its strengths in terms of what scientifically it has set out to do. The trial is the best method if one wants to compare a therapy against something else because it is only that process of randomization that allows us the ability to compare without confounding one thing against another. What registries are superb at is broadening the patient base and including the type of patient who might not have been included in the clinical study and they are very good at allowing us insights into practice patterns. Things like: how often do patients go to the cathlab; how often do they have bypass surgery. So the two entities， randomized trials and registries， should be thought about working together， not competing with one another.
    Harrington教授:我们不应该认为注册研究跟临床试验是竞争的关系，他们应该互为补充。试验是我们比较一疗法与其他疗法的优劣的最好方法，因为仅仅采用随机试验的方法就可以相互比较而没有混杂因素的影响。注册研究是非常好的一种方式，它扩大了患者人群，包括在临床研究中可能不会入选的患者，并且便于了解实践模式。比如：患者多长时间接受一次介入治疗；做搭桥手术多长时间一次。因此，这两种形式，随机试验和注册研究，应该结合起来一起考虑，而不是彼此竞争。

上一页  [1]  [2]  [3]  [4]