Evidence-based Medicine
Review | The importance of using placebo controls in nonpharmacological randomized trials
21 Apr, 2023 | 13:02h | UTCThe importance of using placebo controls in nonpharmacological randomised trials – Pain
Opinion | In-person schooling is essential even during periods of high transmission of COVID-19
18 Apr, 2023 | 13:36h | UTC
ChatGPT et al? Not so fast, say journal editors
11 Apr, 2023 | 14:36h | UTCChatGPT et al? Not So Fast, Say Journal Editors – TCTMD
Related:
AI-Generated Medical Advice—GPT and Beyond – JAMA (free for a limited period)
Chat GPT will change Medicine – Vinay Prasad’s Observations and Thoughts
The use of ChatGPT and other large language models in surgical science – BJS Open
ChatGPT vs. NCI: analyzing the quality of cancer information on myths and misconceptions
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine & ChatGPT: De-Tether the Physician – Journal of Medical Systems (if the link is paywalled, try this one)
Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? – Critical Care
Artificial intelligence in academic writing: a paradigm-shifting technological advance
Perspective | ChatGPT-assisted diagnosis: is the future suddenly here?
Perspective | Generating scholarly content with ChatGPT: ethical challenges for medical publishing
ChatGPT: Will It Transform the World of Health Care? – UCSF Department of Medicine
ChatGPT and the future of medical writing (ChatGPT itself wrote this paper)
ChatGPT: five priorities for research – Nature
The path forward for ChatGPT in academia – Lumo’s Newsletter
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author – Science
Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use – Nature
ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove – Nature
Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists
Methodology and Design of Platform Trials | A meta-epidemiological study
31 Mar, 2023 | 13:22h | UTCRelated:
Platform trials: the future of medical research? – The Lancet Respiratory Medicine
Platform Trials — Beware the Noncomparable Control Group – New England Journal of Medicine
Opinion | ChatGPT will change Medicine
30 Mar, 2023 | 14:22h | UTCChat GPT will change Medicine – Vinay Prasad’s Observations and Thoughts
Related:
The use of ChatGPT and other large language models in surgical science – BJS Open
ChatGPT vs. NCI: analyzing the quality of cancer information on myths and misconceptions
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine & ChatGPT: De-Tether the Physician – Journal of Medical Systems (if the link is paywalled, try this one)
Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? – Critical Care
Artificial intelligence in academic writing: a paradigm-shifting technological advance
Perspective | ChatGPT-assisted diagnosis: is the future suddenly here?
Perspective | Generating scholarly content with ChatGPT: ethical challenges for medical publishing
ChatGPT: Will It Transform the World of Health Care? – UCSF Department of Medicine
ChatGPT and the future of medical writing (ChatGPT itself wrote this paper)
ChatGPT: five priorities for research – Nature
The path forward for ChatGPT in academia – Lumo’s Newsletter
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author – Science
Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use – Nature
ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove – Nature
Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists
Trends of randomized clinical trials citing prior systematic reviews, 2007-2021
27 Mar, 2023 | 12:56h | UTCTrends of Randomized Clinical Trials Citing Prior Systematic Reviews, 2007-2021 – JAMA Network Open
Invited Commentary: Should a Systematic Review Be Required in a Clinical Trial Report? Perhaps, But Not Yet – JAMA Network Open
Commentary on Twitter
The percentage of RCTs citing systematic reviews increased from 36% in 2007-8 to 72% since 2020. RCTs with ≥100 participants, nonindustry funders, and authors from high-income countries were more likely to cite systematic reviews. https://t.co/rMN7eEmkqD
— JAMA Network Open (@JAMANetworkOpen) March 23, 2023
Opinion | The rapid growth of mega-journals: threats and opportunities
22 Mar, 2023 | 13:40h | UTCThe Rapid Growth of Mega-Journals: Threats and Opportunities – JAMA (free for a limited period)
Opinion | Irreconcilable differences: the divorce between response rates, progression-free survival, and overall survival
20 Mar, 2023 | 13:45h | UTC
Methods Primer | Non-linear predictor outcome associations
17 Mar, 2023 | 12:52h | UTCNon-linear predictor outcome associations – BMJ Medicine
Proposed triggers for retiring a living systematic review
15 Mar, 2023 | 15:02h | UTCProposed triggers for retiring a living systematic review – BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine
Video | Tutorial explores ways of analyzing data from RCTs, including intention-to-treat, per-protocol, and as-treated analyses
14 Mar, 2023 | 13:53h | UTCGood Intentions to Treat – NEJM Evidence
SR | Do treatment effects in randomized trials differ when using active placebo compared to standard placebo?
14 Mar, 2023 | 13:25h | UTC
Commentary on Twitter
? In our recent #Cochrane Review, we look at the impact of using #ActivePlacebo control versus standard placebo in randomised drug trials. https://t.co/7VwTOSRKxF#Blinding #Unblinding #Placebo #Bias @cochranemthds @AsgerPaludan @ChrisPaWer
1/10
— David Laursen (@LaursenDavid) March 8, 2023
Perspective | How to not be completely wrong about masks
8 Mar, 2023 | 14:25h | UTCHow to not be completely wrong about masks – The Munro Report
Related:
SR | Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses
Hospital masking should be optional – Sensible Medicine
RCT | Medical masks vs. N95 respirators for preventing COVID-19 among health care workers.
Commentary on Twitter
Excellent and sensible interpretation of the data, on both ends of the spectrum, and everything in between.
(Will forgive the split infinitive in the title. ?)
How to not be completely wrong about masks, by @apsmunro https://t.co/85Ot6oUOZF
— Paul Sax (@PaulSaxMD) March 2, 2023
Perspective | Artificial intelligence in medicine & ChatGPT: de-tether the physician
7 Mar, 2023 | 13:10h | UTCArtificial Intelligence in Medicine & ChatGPT: De-Tether the Physician – Journal of Medical Systems (if the link is paywalled, try this one)
Related:
Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? – Critical Care
Artificial intelligence in academic writing: a paradigm-shifting technological advance
Perspective | ChatGPT-assisted diagnosis: is the future suddenly here?
Perspective | Generating scholarly content with ChatGPT: ethical challenges for medical publishing
ChatGPT: Will It Transform the World of Health Care? – UCSF Department of Medicine
ChatGPT and the future of medical writing (ChatGPT itself wrote this paper)
ChatGPT: five priorities for research – Nature
The path forward for ChatGPT in academia – Lumo’s Newsletter
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author – Science
Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use – Nature
ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove – Nature
Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists
ChatGPT has many uses. Experts explore what this means for healthcare and medical research
7 Mar, 2023 | 13:11h | UTCRelated:
Artificial Intelligence in Medicine & ChatGPT: De-Tether the Physician – Journal of Medical Systems (if the link is paywalled, try this one)
Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? – Critical Care
Artificial intelligence in academic writing: a paradigm-shifting technological advance
Perspective | ChatGPT-assisted diagnosis: is the future suddenly here?
Perspective | Generating scholarly content with ChatGPT: ethical challenges for medical publishing
ChatGPT: Will It Transform the World of Health Care? – UCSF Department of Medicine
ChatGPT and the future of medical writing (ChatGPT itself wrote this paper)
ChatGPT: five priorities for research – Nature
The path forward for ChatGPT in academia – Lumo’s Newsletter
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author – Science
Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use – Nature
ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove – Nature
Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists
Registry randomized trials: a methodological perspective
6 Mar, 2023 | 14:00h | UTCRegistry randomised trials: a methodological perspective – BMJ Open
Opinion | There is no such thing as a validated prediction model
1 Mar, 2023 | 13:57h | UTCThere is no such thing as a validated prediction model – BMC Medicine
Is a one-size-fits-all ‘12-month rule’ appropriate when it comes to the last search date in systematic reviews?
1 Mar, 2023 | 13:48h | UTC
Commentary on Twitter
Is a one-size-fits-all ‘12-month rule’ appropriate when it comes to the last search date in systematic reviews?
Analysis by @gillianstokesm @EPPICentre @KatySutcliffe @UCLSocRes @James_M_Thomas #OpenAccess
Link: https://t.co/aNAdDXgphn pic.twitter.com/f2JZiaVDtz
— BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine (@BMJ_EBM) January 17, 2023
Perspective | The inertia of clinical trials and unethical control arms in oncology
28 Feb, 2023 | 13:51h | UTCThe inertia of clinical trials and unethical control arms – Sensible Medicine
Unique considerations for patient retention in decentralized clinical trials
28 Feb, 2023 | 13:43h | UTC
Analysis of rates of completion, delays, and participant recruitment in randomized clinical trials in surgery
28 Feb, 2023 | 13:25h | UTC
Commentary on Twitter
Fewer than one-in-six surgical RCTs registered on https://t.co/FRe6v3XZPP successfully recruit their target sample size within their planned timeframe. https://t.co/hZLH0LTDpq
— JAMA Network Open (@JAMANetworkOpen) January 17, 2023
Perspective | Beware of overdiagnosis harms from screening, lower diagnostic thresholds, and incidentalomas
27 Feb, 2023 | 13:18h | UTCSummary: This article discusses the concept of overdiagnosis and its relevance to clinical practice guidelines. Overdiagnosis is the diagnosis of a condition that, if unrecognized, would not result in symptoms or cause a patient harm during their lifetime, such as discovering a low-grade cancer that will never lead to symptoms at the end of life. But, unlike false positives, overdiagnosed individuals truly have the condition; they just don’t benefit from the diagnosis. Overdiagnosis can also result from lowering diagnostic thresholds for diagnosing a disease, which inflates diagnosis rates among patients and leads to recommendations for subsequent interventions without clear benefits. The article highlights the importance of providing accurate information to patients about the possibility and burden of overdiagnosis to inform shared decision-making and minimize the harms of screening interventions.
Related:
Overdiagnosis: it’s official – The BMJ
Overdiagnosis: what it is and what it isn’t – BMJ Evidence Based Medicine
Overdiagnosis across medical disciplines: a scoping review – The BMJ Open
Too much medical care: bad for you, bad for health care systems – STAT News
Overdiagnosis: causes and consequences in primary health care – Canadian Family Physician
Five warning signs of overdiagnosis – The Conversation
What is overdiagnosed cancer? And why does it matter? – Croakey
Blame rising cancer overdiagnosis on ‘irrational exuberance’ for early detection – STAT
A food allergy epidemic… or just another case of overdiagnosis?
An epidemic of overdiagnosis: Melanoma diagnoses sky rocket
Perspective | Can artificial intelligence help for scientific writing?
27 Feb, 2023 | 13:09h | UTCCan artificial intelligence help for scientific writing? – Critical Care
Related:
Perspective | ChatGPT-assisted diagnosis: is the future suddenly here?
Perspective | Generating scholarly content with ChatGPT: ethical challenges for medical publishing
ChatGPT: Will It Transform the World of Health Care? – UCSF Department of Medicine
ChatGPT and the future of medical writing (ChatGPT itself wrote this paper)
ChatGPT: five priorities for research – Nature
The path forward for ChatGPT in academia – Lumo’s Newsletter
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author – Science
Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use – Nature
ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove – Nature
Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists
Artificial intelligence in academic writing: a paradigm-shifting technological advance
27 Feb, 2023 | 13:07h | UTCArtificial intelligence in academic writing: a paradigm-shifting technological advance – Nature Reviews Urology (free for a limited period)
Commentary on Twitter
Artificial Intelligence will not replace academics, but academics who use AI will replace those who do not.
-We should discuss boundaries/ethical issues!@NatRevUrol @OncoAlert @Roei_Golan7 @AkhilMuthigi @ranjithramamd @VincentRK @VPrasadMDMPH #ChatGPT https://t.co/neAtxrRXI8 pic.twitter.com/gOpzbdg1mO— Yüksel Ürün (@DrYukselUrun) February 26, 2023
Related:
Perspective | ChatGPT-assisted diagnosis: is the future suddenly here?
Perspective | Generating scholarly content with ChatGPT: ethical challenges for medical publishing
ChatGPT: Will It Transform the World of Health Care? – UCSF Department of Medicine
ChatGPT and the future of medical writing (ChatGPT itself wrote this paper)
ChatGPT: five priorities for research – Nature
The path forward for ChatGPT in academia – Lumo’s Newsletter
ChatGPT is fun, but not an author – Science
Tools such as ChatGPT threaten transparent science; here are our ground rules for their use – Nature
ChatGPT listed as author on research papers: many scientists disapprove – Nature
Abstracts written by ChatGPT fool scientists
Health technology assessment of diagnostic tests: a state of the art review of methods guidance from international organizations
27 Feb, 2023 | 12:34h | UTC