CoxEBorioLTempleR. Evaluating Ebola therapies—the case for RCTs. N Engl J Med2014; 371: 2350–2351.
3.
RidAEmanuelEJ. Ethical considerations of experimental interventions in the Ebola outbreak. Lancet2014; 384: 1896–1899.
4.
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health. Questions and answers. PREVAIL phase 2/3 clinical trial of investigational Ebola vaccines, http://www.niaid.nih.gov/news/QA/Pages/EbolaVaxresultsQA.aspx (2015, accessed 9 September 2015).
5.
CaplanALPlunkettCLevinB. Selecting the right tool for the job. Am J Bioeth2015; 15: 4–10.
6.
AdebamowoCBah-SowOBinkaF. Randomised controlled trials for Ebola: practical and ethical issues. Lancet2014; 384: 1423–1424.
7.
JonesDSPodolskySH. The history and fate of the gold standard. Lancet2015; 385: 1502–1503.
8.
CartwrightNMunroE. The limitations of randomized controlled trials in predicting effectiveness. J Eval Clin Pract2010; 16: 260–266.
9.
CartwrightN. A philosopher’s view of the long road from RCTs to effectiveness. Lancet2011; 377: 1400–1401.
10.
WorrallJ. What evidence in evidence-based medicine?Philos Sci2002; 69: S316–S330.
11.
La CazeADjulbegovicBSennS. What does randomisation achieve?Evid Based Med2012; 17: 1–2.
12.
YusufSCollinsRPetoR. Why do we need some large, simple randomized trials?Stat Med1984; 3: 409–422.
Henao-RestrepoAMLonginiIMEggerM. Efficacy and effectiveness of an rVSV-vectored vaccine expressing Ebola surface glycoprotein: interim results from the Guinea ring vaccination cluster-randomised trial. Lancet2015; 386: 857–866.
15.
HillAB. The philosophy of the clinical trial. In: Statistical methods in clinical and preventive medicine. Edinburgh: E&S Livingston, 1962, p6.