Call 413.540.1234 to
schedule an appointment
CONCERN/EAP: 413.534.2625
Billing questions? Call: 413.540.1212
CRISIS: 413.733.6661

Health Policy & Advocacy
Resources
Basic InformationMore InformationLatest News
FDA Gets Tough on Juul, Other E-Cigarette Makers'No Documented Reason' for 1 in 3 Outpatient Opioid Rxs: StudyUrgent Care Centers Ease ER Burden in U.S.Poor Health Care Linked to 5 Million Deaths Worldwide a Year'Million Hearts' Project Aims to Prevent 1 Million Cardiac CrisesDoctor Burnout Likely to Impair CareHomelessness Takes Toll on Kids' Health Even Before They're BornFDA Warns of Dangers of Liquid Nitrogen in Food, DrinksStates Struggle With Onslaught of Opioid OD DeathsAHA: Why More Americans Are Kicking the Smoking HabitMonitoring System for Underage Tobacco Sales Falls Short: StudyHundreds of Human, Pet Homeopathy Products RecalledAHA: CPR Training at School Now Required in 38 StatesGovernment Rules Aimed at Curbing Opioid Prescriptions May Have BackfiredGut Enzyme Could Help Solve U.S. Blood ShortagesHealth Tip: Making an Emergency CallFrom Pigs to Peacocks, What's Up With Those 'Emotional-Support Animals'?Global Aid Programs Shortchange Teen Health Needs: StudyDoctors Write Fewer Opioid Scripts After Learning of Overdose DeathHow to Become an Educated PatientU.S. Murder, Suicide Rates Climbing AgainTo Boost Colon Cancer Screening, Use the MailMajority in U.S. Support Medical Pot, Think It Could Fight Opioid CrisisWhey Powder Blamed for Salmonella Tied to Ritz Crackers, Goldfish: FDAToo Few Americans Getting Screened for Cancer: CDCYou Have 11 Seconds to Tell Your Doc What's WrongFDA Warns of Deaths Tied to Tainted Synthetic PotWhere Are Opioid Painkillers Prescribed the Most?In the ICU, Patients' Relatives Often Mum About Care ConcernsResetting E-Prescriptions for Opioids Helps Curb Use: StudyHealth Tip: If You're 45 or Older, Get Screened for Colorectal CancerRed Cross Issues Nationwide Call for Blood DonationsDoctor Burnout Widespread, Helps Drive Many Medical ErrorsWarming Climate, More AC -- and More Unhealthy Smog AheadEven at 'Safe' Levels, Air Pollution May Boost Diabetes RiskDeath Certificate Data May Miss Many Opioid ODs: StudyRaise the Bar on CPR, Heart Group SaysWhen DEA Cracked Down on Opioids, Abusers Moved to Black Market: StudyStigma of Safe Needle Exchanges Lingers Despite Opioid EpidemicAHA: Drones a Lifesaver for Cardiac Arrest Patients?Millions Die Worldwide Each Year for Lack of Quality CareTips for Handling a Medical EmergencyAHA: Lifesaving Info Not Always a 911 Call AwayMany, But Not All, Hospitals Require Flu Shots for StaffersCancer Care Twice as Costly in U.S. Versus CanadaAHA: Health Concerns Haunt Puerto Rico as New Hurricane Season BeginsPot, Opioids Now Rival Alcohol as Factor in Driver DeathsThe ER or Urgent Care?Trumps Signs Bill Allowing Terminal Patients to Try Unproven MedicinesTough State Drunk Driving Laws Save Lives
Questions and AnswersLinksBook Reviews
Related Topics

Early Studies Often Show Exaggerated Treatment Effect


HealthDay News
Updated: Feb 27th 2018

new article illustration

TUESDAY, Feb. 27, 2018 (HealthDay News) -- Trials to evaluate drugs or devices used to treat chronic medical conditions that are published early in the chain of evidence often show an exaggerated treatment effect compared with subsequent trials, according to research published online Feb. 21 in the Mayo Clinical Proceedings.

Fares Alahdab, M.D., from the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., and colleagues assessed meta-analyses (MAs), published between Jan. 1, 2007, and June 23, 2015, in the 10 general medical journals with highest impact factor to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating a drug or device in patients with chronic medical conditions.

The researchers identified 70 MAs that had included a total of 930 RCTs with an average follow-up of 24 months. An exaggerated early effect (defined as the proportion of MAs with largest effect or heterogeneity in the first two trials) was seen in 37 percent of MAs. On average, the effect size in the early trials was 2.67 times larger than the overall pooled effect size (ratio of relative effects, 2.67). There were no significant associations between the presence of exaggerated effect and trial size; number of events; length of follow-up; intervention duration; number of study sites; inpatient versus outpatient setting; funding source; stopping a trial early; adequacy of random sequence generation, allocation concealment, or blinding; loss to follow-up; or the test for publication bias.

"Considering the increasing morbidity and mortality of chronic medical conditions, decision makers should act on early evidence with caution," the authors write.

Abstract/Full Text
Editorial