Liu, J. L. Y. and Wyatt, Jeremy C.. (2011) The case for randomized controlled trials to assess the impact of clinical information systems. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, Vol.18 (No.2). pp. 173-180. ISSN 1067-5027

Full text not available from this repository.

Abstract

There is a persistent view of a significant minority in the medical informatics community that the randomized controlled trial (ROT) has a limited role to play in evaluating clinical information systems. A common reason voiced by skeptics is that these systems are fundamentally different from drug interventions, so the RCT is irrelevant. There is an urgent need to promote the use of RCTs, given the shift to evidence-based policy and the need to demonstrate cost-effectiveness of these systems. The authors suggest returning to first principles and argue that what is required is clarity about how to match methods to evaluation questions. The authors address common concerns about RCTs, and the extent to which they are fallacious, and also discuss the challenges of conducting RCTs in informatics and alternative study designs when randomized trials are infeasible. While neither a perfect nor universal evaluation method, RCTs form an important part of an evaluator's toolkit.

Item Type:	Journal Article
Divisions:	Faculty of Science > WMG (Formerly the Warwick Manufacturing Group)
Journal or Publication Title:	Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association
Publisher:	BMJ Publishing Group
ISSN:	1067-5027
Date:	2011
Volume:	Vol.18
Number:	No.2
Page Range:	pp. 173-180
Identification Number:	10.1136/jamia.2010.010306
Status:	Peer Reviewed
Publication Status:	Published
Funder:	Scottish Funding Council
URI:	http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/id/eprint/41593

Data sourced from Thomson Reuters' Web of Knowledge

Request changes to a record

Actions (login required)

View Item