
doi: 10.1007/bf02962268
pmid: 9795803
Randomized controlled clinical trials are the preferred scientific method and remain the vital bridge between basic science and improvements in health care according to general agreement. However, discussion has revealed various critical issues in the field of intraabdominal infection. Many of these critical points can be dealt with by prognostic scoring systems. In this paper the application areas for scores in clinical trials on intraabdominal infections are presented. These areas cover: assessment of severity of disease, definition of inclusion/exclusion criteria, analysis of comparability, adjustment for noncomparability, definition of end points and comparison of observed versus predicted outcome. The use of scoring systems in defining treatment policies is still experimental.
Patient Selection, Bacterial Infections, Peritonitis, Prognosis, Severity of Illness Index, Treatment Outcome, Research Design, Abdomen, Humans, APACHE, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Patient Selection, Bacterial Infections, Peritonitis, Prognosis, Severity of Illness Index, Treatment Outcome, Research Design, Abdomen, Humans, APACHE, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 7 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
