Barton S. Which clinical studies provide the best evidence: the best RCT still trumps the best observational study. BMJ. 2000;321(7256):255–6.
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Akobeng AK. Understanding randomized controlled trials. Arch Dis Child. 2005;90:840–4.
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Evans D. Hierarchy of evidence: a framework for ranking evidence evaluating healthcare interventions. J Clin Nurs. 2003;12:77–84.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Rothwell PM. External validity of randomized controlled trials: “to whom do the results of this trial apply?”. Lancet. 2005;365:82–93.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Treweek S, Zwarenstein M. Making trials matter: pragmatic and explanatory trials and the problem of applicability. Trials. 2009;10:37–10.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Ware JH, Hamel MB. Pragmatic trials—guides to better patient care? N Engl J Med. 2011;364:1685–7.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Chalkidou K, Tunis S, Whicher D, Fowler R, Zwarenstein M. The role of pragmatic randomized controlled trials (pRCTs) in comparative effectiveness research. Clin Trials. 2012;9:436.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Schwartz D, Lellouch J. Explanatory and pragmatic attitudes in therapeutical trials. J Chronic Dis. 1967;20:637–48.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Godwin M, Ruhland L, Casson I, et al. Pragmatic controlled clinical trials in primary care: the struggle between external and internal validity. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2003;3:28.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Elridge S. Pragmatic trials in primary healthcare: what, when, and how? Fam Pract. 2010;27:591–2.
Article
Google Scholar
Mitka M. FDA advisory decision highlights some problems inherent in pragmatic trials. JAMA. 2011;306:1851–2.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Sugarman J, Califf RM. Ethics and regulatory complexities for pragmatic clinical trials. JAMA. 2014;311:2381–2.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD, Treweek S, Furberg CD, Altman DG, Tunis S, Bergel E, Harvey I, Magid DJ, Chalkidou K. A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62:464–75.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M, Oxman AD, Treweek S, Furberg CD, Altman DG, Tunis S, Bergel E, Harvey I, Magid DJ, Chalkidou K. A pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary (PRECIS): a tool to help trial designers. CMAJ. 2009;180:E47–57.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Loudon K, Treweek S, Sullivan F, Donnan P, Thorpe KE, Zwarenstein M. The PRECIS-2 tool: designing trials that are fit for purpose. BMJ. 2015;350:h22147.
Article
Google Scholar
Loudon K, Zwarenstein M, Sullivan F, Donnan P, Treweek S. Making clinical trials more relevant: improving and validating the PRECIS tool for matching trial design decisions to trial purpose. BMC Trials. 2013;14:115.
Article
Google Scholar
Patsopoulos NA. A pragmatic view of pragmatic trials. Dialogues in Neurosci. 2011;13(2):217–24.
Google Scholar
Yoong S, Wolfenden L, Clinton-McHarg T, et al. Exploring the pragmatic and explanatory study design on outcomes of systematic reviews of public health interventions: a case study on obesity prevention trials. J Public Health (Oxf). 2014;36(1):170–6.
Article
Google Scholar
Koppenaal T, Linmans J, Knottnerus JA, Spigt M. Pragmatic vs. explanatory: an adaptation of the PRECIS tool helps to judge the applicability of systematic reviews for daily practice. J Clin Epi. 2011;64(10):1095–101.
Article
Google Scholar
Tosh G, Soares-Weiser K, Adams CE. Pragmatic vs explanatory trials: the pragmascope tool to help measure differences in protocols of mental health randomized controlled trials. Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2011;13(2):209–15.
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Glasgow RE, Gaglio B, Bennett G, Jerome GJ, Yeh H, Sarwer DB, et al. Applying the PRECIS criteria to describe three effectiveness trials of weight loss in obese patients with comorbid conditions. Health Serv Res. 2012;47(3):1051–67.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Witt CM, Manheimer E, Hammerschlag R, et al. How well do randomized trials inform decision making: systematic review using comparative effectiveness research measures on acupuncture for back pain. PLoS One. 2012;7:e32399.
Article
CAS
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Jordan AE, Perlman DC, Smith DJ, Reed JR, Hagan H. Use of the PRECIS-II instrument to categorize reports along the efficacy-effectiveness spectrum in an hepatitis C virus care continuum systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017; Epub ahead of print.
Louma KA, Leavitt IM, Marrs JC, Nederveld AL, Regensteiner JG, Dunn AL, et al. How can clinical practices pragmatically increase physical activity for patients with type 2 diabetes? A systematic review. Transl Behav Med. 2017;7(4):751–72.
Article
Google Scholar
Aves T, Allan KS, Lawson D, Nieuwlaat R, Beyene J, Mbuagbaw L. The role of pragmatism in explaining heterogeneity in meta-analyses of randomized trials: a protocol for a cross-sectional methodological review. BMJ Open. 2017;7(9):e017887.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar
Baker R, Jackson D. A new approach to outliers in meta-analysis. Health Care Manag Sci. 2008;11(2):121–31.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Beath KJ. A finite mixture method for outlier detection and robustness in meta-analysis. Res Syn Meth. 2014;5:285–93.
Article
Google Scholar
Lee KJ, Thompson SG. Flexible parametric models for random effects distributions. Stat Med. 2008;27:418–34.
Article
PubMed
Google Scholar
Waters E, de Silva-Sanigorski A, Burford BJ, et al. Interventions for preventing obesity in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;Issue 12. Art. No.:CD001871. DOI: 10.1002
Google Scholar
Landis JR, Koch G. An application of hierarchical kappa-type statistics in the assessment of majority agreement among multiple observers. Biometrics. 1977;33(1):363–74.
Article
CAS
PubMed
Google Scholar
R Core Team. A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2013.
Google Scholar
Maclure M. Explaining pragmatic trials to pragmatic policy-makers. CMAJ. 2009;180(10):1001–3.
Article
PubMed
PubMed Central
Google Scholar