What question did this study set out to answer?

This research aims to assess the agreement among raters when ranking patient experiences in clinical trials.

The use of subjective rankings in clinical trials with an application to cardiovascular disease

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

Randomized trial examines subjective ranking agreement to evaluate treatments in cardiovascular disease, suggesting feasibility for analysis.

This research aims to assess the agreement among raters when ranking patient experiences in clinical trials.
Conducted a study with 20 raters evaluating 43 trial experiences from an imaginary cardiovascular clinical trial.
Analyzed the degree of consensus among raters regarding the rankings.
Compared average ranks to conventional quantitative ranking methods and common weightings used in cardiovascular trials.
Raters demonstrated a high degree of consensus in their rankings.
Average ranks aligned well with two quantitative ranking approaches.
Average ranks showed less agreement with typical weightings used in cardiovascular trials.

Follmann et al. (1992) studied this question.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Randomized trial examines subjective ranking agreement to evaluate treatments in cardiovascular disease, suggesting feasibility for analysis.