ABSTRACT
N-of-1 trial designs have rarely been used in bodywork research. Using a recent trial as a methodological pilot, critical issues related to the applicability of N-of-1 trials to bodywork are discussed. These include the issues of carry-over effects, bias-controlling approaches and statistical analysis. The discussion highlights the importance of mixed methods and draws some suggestions for a future research program. N-of-1 trials could be used to provide insights about some essential elements of bodywork modalities and their effectiveness.
ABSTRACT
Ensaios clínicos randomizados (ECR) são o padrão ouro para desenho experimental de estudo ou ensaio clínico. Apenas por meio de uma investigação do tipo ECR é possível avaliar e demonstrar a relação de causa-e-efeito entre um conjunto de variáveis independentes e dependentes. O ECR adicionou vantagens em relação aos outros modelos experimentais, principalmente devido à presença de um grupo controle. Existem várias críticas à validade interna das pesquisas em saúde, incluindo preconceitos e desvantagens que são apontadas para seu descrédito. OBJETIVO: O objetivo do presente estudo é informar características, vantagens, desvantagens e desvios deste método científico. MATERIAL E MÉTODOS: Análise crítica de método científico com base em revisão narrativa da literatura. Foi consultada a base de dados Medline por meio dos portais PubMed e Scopus, sem data de início e até julho de 2020, para extração das informações relativas aos ECR. Apenas artigos de língua inglesa foram incluídos, usando as palavras-chave "estudo randomizado controlado", "ensaio clínico randomizado", "projeto experimental" e "estudo experimental", intercaladas pelos operadores booleanos "AND ," "OR" e "NOT". Anais de conferências e resumos não foram considerados para a análise dos dados. RESULTADOS: Dos ECR selecionados, foram extraídas características, vantagens, desvantagens, importância e vantagens dos controles em pesquisa, o princípio de equilíbrio, ensaios clínicos randomizados na população pediátrica, ECR na população geriátrica, ameaças à validade interna e medidas para minimização de viéses e preconceitos em ECR. CONCLUSÃO: Tópicos relevantes dos ECR foram explicados nesta revisão que devem guiar pesquisadores clínicos.
Randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the gold standard of experimental design or clinical trial design. Only by RCT in research, the cause-and-effect relationship between a set of independent and dependent variables could be demonstrated. RCT has added advantages over other experimental designs due to the presence of the control group. The importance of control in health research trials and its advantages to be elaborated. Though various threats to internal validity in health research trials could be minimized by RCT, various biases in RCT and disadvantages add to its discredit. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present narrative review is to brief the characteristics, advantages, disadvantages, and various biases in RCT. METHODS: This review does not follow the PRISMA statement, as it was a narrative review. Two databases, namely, Medline through PubMed and Scopus, were searched from inception to July 2020 for the information pertaining to RCTs and included in this narrative review. Only English language articles were searched with the keywords, "Randomized controlled trial," "Randomized clinical trial," "experimental design," and "experimental study." These keywords are linked together by the Boolean words, "AND," "OR" and "NOT." Conference proceedings and only abstracts were not considered for the review. RESULTS: RCTs were explained under characteristics, advantages, disadvantages, importance, and advantages of controls in research, the principle of equipoise, RCTs in the pediatric population, RCTs in the geriatric population, threats to internal validity and steps to minimize them and various biases in RCTs. CONCLUSION: The narrative presentation of RCTs under various important topics have been explained in this review.