When Averages Hide Individual Differences in Clinical Trials
The content you've requested is available without charge only to active Sigma Xi members and affiliates.
If you are an active member, affiliate or individual subscriber, please log in now in order to access this article. Be sure you've entered your member or subscriber number on your profile page. (You can access your profile page through the green box to the right.)
If you are not a member, affiliate or individual subscriber, you can:
The development and approval of medical therapies today relies on a mid-20th-century invention called the randomized clinical trial. Patients are recruited for an experimental treatment; a random subsample gets a placebo or different approach; any difference in the aggregated outcomes of the groups is attributed to the effects of the treatment. But the risks and benefits of a treatment typically vary substantially from one patient to the next. A small minority of high-risk patients can manifest dramatic results that obscure the fact that the same treatment is barely beneficial or actually harmful to most patients. The authors advocate using risk-stratified analysis to better understand how treatments affect the individual.