Trials
Volume 8
|
Viewing options:Associated material:Related literature:- Articles citing this article
- Other articles by authors
- Related articles/pages
Tools:Post to:
|
This article is part of a series on Standardization of outcomes, edited by Doug Altman.  CommentaryStandardising outcomes for clinical trials and systematic reviewsMike Clarke  School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College Dublin, 24 D'Olier Street, Dublin 4, Ireland  author email corresponding author email
Trials 2007,
8:39doi:10.1186/1745-6215-8-39
|
|
| Published: |
26 November 2007 |
First paragraph (this article has no abstract)
Fifteen years ago, what was to become OMERACT met for the first time in The Netherlands to discuss ways in which the multitude of outcomes in assessments of the effects of treatments for rheumatoid arthritis might be standardised. In Trials, Tugwell et al have described the need for, and success of, this initiative [1] and Cooney and colleagues have set out their plans for a corresponding initiative for ulcerative colitis [2]. Why do we need such initiatives? What's the problem? And are these and other initiatives the solution? | 
on Google Scholar
