You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 160 No. 11, November 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Evidence-Based Journal Club
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on ISI (2)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Evidence-Based Journal Club
 •Statistics and Research Methods
 •Infectious Diseases
 •Viral Infections
 •Randomized Controlled Trial
 •Prognosis/ Outcomes
 •Pediatrics, Other
 •Alert me on articles by topic

Interpreting Negative Results From an Underpowered Clinical Trial

Warts and All

Jeanne Van Cleave, MD; Alex R. Kemper, MD, MPH, MS; Matthew M. Davis, MD, MAPP

Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160(11):1126-1129.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In the randomized, placebo-controlled trial by de Haen et al1 that appears in this issue of the ARCHIVES, the application of duct tape is compared with placebo as a treatment for common warts. The investigators recruited 103 children in the Netherlands from primary schools and assessed them for warts. Those with warts were randomized to 1 of 2 groups. One group received duct tape to apply to a designated wart, and the other group received a placebo in the form of a corn pad to apply around the wart. The primary outcome of the study was resolution of the designated wart 6 weeks after initiation of therapy. Other outcomes included change in the size of the designated wart and resolution of surrounding warts. Differences in complete resolution of the designated wart were not . . . [Full Text of this Article]

WERE THE STUDY PATIENTS SIMILAR TO ACTUAL PATIENTS?


WERE PATIENTS RANDOMIZED? WERE THE PATIENTS IN THE TREATMENT AND CONTROL GROUPS SIMILAR WITH RESPECT TO KNOWN PROGNOSTIC FACTORS?

WERE PATIENTS AWARE OF GROUP ALLOCATION? WAS THE OBSERVER AWARE OF GROUP ALLOCATION?

WAS FOLLOW-UP COMPLETE? WERE PATIENTS ANALYZED IN THE GROUPS TO WHICH THEY WERE RANDOMIZED?

STATISTICAL POWER AND TYPE II ERROR

HOW PRECISE WAS THE ESTIMATE OF THE TREATMENT EFFECT?

WERE ALL CLINICALLY IMPORTANT OUTCOMES CONSIDERED?

CONCLUSIONS

AUTHOR INFORMATION

RELATED ARTICLE

Efficacy of Duct Tape vs Placebo in the Treatment of Verruca Vulgaris (Warts) in Primary School Children
Marloes de Haen, Marcus G. Spigt, Caro J. T. van Uden, Pierre van Neer, Frans J. M. Feron, and André Knottnerus
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160(11):1121-1125.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Studies Should Report Estimates of Treatment Effects With Confidence Intervals
Cummings
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2007;161:518-519.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2006 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.