Hoffmann, R. A wiki for the life sciences where authorship matters. Nature Genetics (2008)

Editor

Personal info

View

About

Terms

Javascript disabled

Please enable Javascript support in your browser to use this application.

Instructions on how to enable JavaScript on different browsers can be found here: http://www.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=23852.

[edit this page]

Bennett, J.E. et al.

Bennett, Kauffman, Walsh, de Pauw, Dismukes, Galgiani, Glauser, Herbrecht, Lee, Pappas, Powers, Rex, Verweij, Viscoli,

Forum report: issues in the evaluation of diagnostic tests, use of historical controls, and merits of the current multicenter collaborative groups.

This forum report contains conclusions about 3 different issues relevant to conducting clinical trials in deep mycoses. (1) Trials of diagnostic tests for deep mycoses must define the population appropriate for testing and the clinical question being asked. The unanswered question for the serum Aspergillus galactomannan assay is whether knowledge of results can change use of empirical therapy to treat febrile patients at high risk of invasive aspergillosis. (2) Use of historical controls is suboptimal but offers a pragmatic solution for studying rare mycoses; use of contemporaneous controls, matched for critical variables and evaluated by a blinded data review committee using detailed criteria, appears optimal. (3) Established groups of independent investigators, such as the European Organization for Research on Treatment of Cancer's Invasive Fungal Infections Group and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases's Bacteriology and Mycology Study Group, provide a pool of experienced investigators, defined operating rules, impartiality, and specialized expertise. Considering the enormous investment required for adequately powered efficacy trials of antifungal agents and the importance of these trials to guide clinical practice, use of collaborative groups outweighs the extra administrative time that is sometimes required.[1]

References

Forum report: issues in the evaluation of diagnostic tests, use of historical controls, and merits of the current multicenter collaborative groups. Bennett, J.E., Kauffman, C., Walsh, T., de Pauw, B., Dismukes, W., Galgiani, J., Glauser, M., Herbrecht, R., Lee, J., Pappas, P., Powers, J., Rex, J., Verweij, P., Viscoli, C. Clin. Infect. Dis. (2003) [Pubmed]

Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenes Open Access Licence Privacy Policy Terms of Use apsburg

The world's first wiki where authorship really matters (Nature Genetics, 2008). Due credit and reputation for authors. Imagine a global collaborative knowledge base for original thoughts. Search thousands of articles and collaborate with scientists around the globe.