Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.
This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables. Abstract In reply Dr Margo is correct in concluding that findings from clinical trials with rigid selection criteria are not universally applicable to all patients and physicians but only to patients who meet the enrollment criteria established for those trials and to physicians with comparable diagnostic and treatment skills. It also is true that certain types of data from community-based outcomes studies have the potential of being more broadly applicable to the universe of patients with a particular condition. However, because of limitations inherent in the outcomes approach (eg, lack of uniform case definitions and lack of appropriate controls), results from carefully controlled clinical trials will continue to serve as guidelines to practice management for the foreseeable future.The COMS misdiagnosis rate, taken in the context of the results of the study by Dr Margo, illustrates the potential for minimizing misdiagnoses in clinical practice. The quality-control mechanisms in the COMS to
Archives of Ophthalmology – American Medical Association
Published: Mar 1, 1997
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.