VickersA.Commentary on Aschmann et al: how do we incorporate harms in analyses of randomized trials?Clin Trials, IN PRESS.
2.
Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ2004; 28: 1490–1494.
3.
AlperBSOettgenPKunnamoI, et al. Defining certainty of net benefit: a GRADE concept paper. BMJ Open2019; 9(6): e027445.
4.
Alonso-CoelloPSchünemannHJMobergJ, et al. GRADE Evidence to Decision (EtD) frameworks: a systematic and transparent approach to making well informed healthcare choices. 1: introduction. BMJ2016; 353: i2016.
5.
BlandJM.The tyranny of power: is there a better way to calculate sample size?BMJ2009; 339: b3985.
6.
SalantiGNikolakopoulouASuttonAJ, et al. Planning a future randomized clinical trial based on a network of relevant past trials. Trials2018; 19(1): 365.
7.
GoudieACSuttonAJJonesDR, et al. Empirical assessment suggests that existing evidence could be used more fully in designing randomized controlled trials. J Clin Epidemiol2010; 63(9): 983–991.
8.
AschmannHEMcNeilJJPuhanMA. Large scale prevention trials could provide stronger evidence for decision makers: opportunities to design and report with a focus on the benefit and harm balance. Clin Trials in press.
