A Critical Review of Papers from Clinical Cancer Research

References

• Altman DG, De Stavola BL, Love SB, Stepniewska KA. Review of survival analyses published in cancer journals. Br J Cancer 1995; 72: 511–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altman DG. Statistics in medical journals: developments in the 1980s. Stat Med 1991; 10: 1897–913.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pocock SJ, Hughes MD, Lee RJ. Statistical problems in the reporting of clinical trials. A survey of three medical journals. N Engl J Med 1987; 317: 426–32.
   Google Scholar
• Altman DG. Statistics in medical journals. Stat Med 1982; 1: 59–71.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, Horton R, Moher D, Olkin I, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA 1996; 276: 637–9.
   Google Scholar
• Piantadosi S, Saijo N, Tamura T. Guidelines for analysis and reporting of clinical trials in oncology. Jpn J Cancer Res 1993; 84: 929–37.
   Google Scholar
• Bailar JC, 3rd, Mosteller F. Guidelines for statistical report-ing in articles for medical journals. Amplifications and expla-nations. Ann Intern Med 1988; 108: 266–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner MJ, Machin D, Campbell MJ. Use of check lists in assessing the statistical content of medical studies. Br Med J Clin Res Ed 1986; 292: 810–2.
   Google Scholar
• Simon R, Wittes RE. Methodologic guidelines for reports of clinical trials. Cancer Treat Rep 1985; 69: 1–3.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Zelen M. Guidelines for publishing papers on cancer clinical trials: responsibilities of editors and authors. J Clin Oncol 1983; 1: 164–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altman DG, Gore SM, Gardner MJ, Pocock SJ. Statistical guidelines for contributors to medical journals. Br Med J Clin Res Ed 1983; 286: 1489–93.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bailar JC, 3rd, Louis TA, Lavori PW, Polansky M. Studies without internal controls. N Engl J Med 1984; 311: 156–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moses LE. The series of consecutive cases as a device for assessing outcomes of intervention. N Engl J Med 1984; 311: 705–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mills JL. Data torturing (see comments). N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 1196–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon R, Altman DG. Statistical aspects of prognostic factor studies in oncology. Br J Cancer 1994; 69: 979–85.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gardner MJ, Altman DG. Confidence intervals rather than values: estimation rather than hypothesis testing. Br Med J Clin Res Ed 1986; 292: 746–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lent V, Langenbach A. A retrospective quality analysis of 102 randomized trials in four leading urological journals from 1984-1989. Urol Res 1996; 24: 119–22.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Andren Sandberg A, Cedercrantz C. Review of standards for reporting results of treatment of exocrine pancreatic cancer. Int .1- Pancreatol 1993; 14: 213–7.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marsoni S, Toni W, Taiana A, et al. Critical review of the quality and development of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and their influence on the treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Ann Oncol 1990; 1: 343–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolucci A, Grilli R, Alexanian AA, Apolone G, Toni V, Liberati A. Quality, evolution, and clinical implications of randomized, controlled trials on the treatment of lung cancer. A lost opportunity for meta-analysis. JAMA 1989; 262: 2101–7.
   Google Scholar
• Zola P, Volpe T, Castelli G, et al. Is the published literature a reliable guide for deciding between alternative treatments for patients with early cervical cancer? Int .1- Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1989; 16: 785–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liberati A, Himel HN, Chalmers TC. A quality assessment of randomized control trials of primary treatment of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4: 942–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meinert CL, Tonascia S, Higgins K. Content of reports on clinical trials: a critical review. Controlled Clinical Trials 1984; 5: 328–47.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Freiman JA, Chalmers TC, Smith H, Jr, Kuebler RR. The importance of beta, the type II error and sample size in the design and interpretation of the randomized control trial. Survey of 71 'negative' trials. N Engl J Med 1978; 299: 690–4.
   Google Scholar
• Mosteller F, Gilbert JP, McPeek B. Reporting standards and research strategies for controlled trials. Agenda for the editor. Controlled Clinical Trials 1980; 1: 37–58.
   Google Scholar
• Moher D, Dulberg CS, Wells GA. Statistical power, sample size, and their reporting in randomized controlled trials. JAMA 1994; 272: 122–4.
   Google Scholar
• Hlatky MA. Using databases to evaluate therapy. Stat Med 1991; 10: 647–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Begg CB, Pocock SJ, Freedman L, Zelen M. State of the art in comparative cancer clinical trials. Cancer 1987; 60: 2811–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Easterbrook PJ, Berlin JA, Gopalan R, Matthews DR. Publi-cation bias in clinical research. Lancet 1991; 337: 867–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar