Letter/Communication
Letter to the Editor: Finding Benefit in n-of-1 Trials
JAMA internal medicine, Vol.179(3), pp.454-455
03/2019
PMID: 30830190
Metrics
57 Record Views
UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:
Source: InCites
Abstract
To the Editor: We read with interest the recent article by Kravitz and colleagues1 describing a randomized clinical trial comparing n-of-1 trials with standard care for treatment of chronic musculoskeletal pain.
The goal of the study was to establish the “benefits of participating in an n-of-1 trial, not to assess the superiority or inferiority of any particular treatment.”1(1369) However, there appears to be a disconnect between the study goal and the choice of outcomes, which were focused on pain interference scores across different treatment regimens. Therefore, the null results should be interpreted with respect to treatment efficacy, not design. The n-of-1 participants who demonstrated a better response to 1 of 2 treatments were likely to experience improved pain outcomes as a result of continuing to receive the superior treatment. However, there was a high proportion (>75%) of n-of-1 participants who had no treatment superiority, and this may explain the trial’s findings.
Details
- Title
- Letter to the Editor: Finding Benefit in n-of-1 Trials
- Creators
- Suzanne McDonald - University of QueenslandJames McGree - Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, AustraliaLydia Bazzano - Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana
- Publication Details
- JAMA internal medicine, Vol.179(3), pp.454-455
- Publisher
- American Medical Association
- Identifiers
- 991013054979302368
- Academic Unit
- Human Sciences; Faculty of Health
- Language
- English
- Resource Type
- Letter/Communication