Why the study?
The complexity and immense costs of RCTs limit their application and the availability of high-quality data to guide clinical care.
Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Review
Describes the tenets of registry-based randomized controlled trials and the development of the first AHPBA/ACS-NSQIP-based registry trial as a low-cost pragmatic alternative to traditional RCTs.
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) represent the gold standard for evidence in clinical medicine because of their ability to account for the effects of unmeasured confounders and selection bias by indication. However, their complexity and immense costs limit their application, and thus the availability of high-quality data to guide clinical care. Registry-based RCTs are a type of pragmatic trial that leverages existing registries as a platform for data collection, providing a low-cost alternative for randomized studies. Herein, we describe the tenets of registry RCTs and the development of the first AHPBA/ACS-NSQIP-based registry trial.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ecker et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: