PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 17, 2025Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research2 citationsOpen Access

Optimizing clinical scientific research: the cohort intervention random sampling study with historical controls

View Full Paper
NKNadine D de KlerkPBPhebe B Q BerbenMVMyrthe van der Ven

Key Points

  • The cohort intervention random sampling study shows potential for effective treatment implementation.
  • CIRSS with historical controls addresses ethical and statistical limitations faced by traditional RCTs.
  • This alternative design maintains the evidence quality of RCTs while allowing for large-scale studies.
  • Further exploration of implementation barriers and ethical considerations is essential for the CIRSS methodology.

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are regarded as the highest level of evidence in medical research, but RCTs also have their drawbacks. Over the years, several alternative study designs have been introduced to address these problems. However, many of the alternative designs are often regarded as inferior to RCTs or currently not suitable for widespread implementation due to, for example, ethical or statistical problems. Thus, there is a need for study designs that have the same level of validity as RCTs, but are also suitable for large-scale implementation. The cohort intervention random sampling study (CIRSS) with historical controls meets these requirements, by combining the strengths of abovementioned designs. The CIRSS with historical controls has the potential to optimize implementation of promising new treatments as fluidly and rapidly as possible, representing real-world clinical population. Further research is required to address the range of analyses, implementation, issues, barriers and facilitators and ethical questions related to CIRSS.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Klerk et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68d45e4431b076d99fa5e243https://doi.org/10.57264/cer-2024-0168
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1A Comparison of Observational Studies and Randomized, Controlled Trials2000 · 2,357 citations
  2. 2Per-Protocol Analyses of Pragmatic Trials2017 · 677 citations
  3. 3Ethical guidelines for epidemiologists1991 · 91 citations
  4. 4Relevance of Sample Size Determination in Medical Research1970 · 130 citations
  5. 5What influences recruitment to randomised controlled trials? A review of trials funded by two UK funding agencies2006 · 974 citations