Trial and error. How to avoid commonly encountered limitations of published clinical trials.

[1]  J. Wittes,et al.  Analysis and interpretation of treatment effects in subgroups of patients in randomized clinical trials. , 1991, JAMA.

[2]  Lawrence Joseph,et al.  Placing trials in context using bayesian analysis: GUSTO revisited by Reverend Bayes , 1995 .

[3]  D. Sackett,et al.  The number needed to treat: a clinically useful measure of treatment effect , 1995, BMJ.

[4]  M J Campbell,et al.  Clinical significance not statistical significance: a simple Bayesian alternative to p values. , 1998, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[5]  Inhibition of the platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa receptor with tirofiban in unstable angina and non-Q-wave myocardial infarction. , 1998, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  S. Goodman.  Toward Evidence-Based Medical Statistics. 1: The P Value Fallacy , 1999, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[7]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Effects of an angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitor, ramipril, on cardiovascular events in high-risk patients. The Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation Study Investigators. , 2000 .

[8]  S. Assmann,et al.  Subgroup analysis and other (mis)uses of baseline data in clinical trials , 2000, The Lancet.

[9]  C D Naylor,et al.  Subgroups, treatment effects, and baseline risks: some lessons from major cardiovascular trials. , 2000, American heart journal.

[10]  E. Braunwald,et al.  Comparison of early invasive and conservative strategies in patients with unstable coronary syndromes treated with the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor tirofiban. , 2001, The New England journal of medicine.

[11]  Jonathan A C Sterne,et al.  Sifting the evidence—what's wrong with significance tests? , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  The Time Investigators.  Trial of invasive versus medical therapy in elderly patients with chronic symptomatic coronary-artery disease (TIME): a randomised trial , 2001, The Lancet.

[13]  D. DeMets,et al.  Principles from clinical trials relevant to clinical practice: Part I. , 2002, Circulation.

[14]  Carl J Pepine,et al.  ACC/AHA guideline update for the management of patients with unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction--2002: summary article: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Committee on the Management of Patients , 2002, Circulation.

[15]  E. Boersma,et al.  Platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in acute coronary syndromes: a meta-analysis of all major randomised clinical trials ☆ , 2002 .

[16]  Robert M Califf,et al.  Lessons learned from recent cardiovascular clinical trials: Part I. , 2002, Circulation.

[17]  Catherine Sudlow,et al.  Collaborative meta-analysis of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy for prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke in high risk patients , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[18]  Nick Freemantle,et al.  Composite outcomes in randomized trials: greater precision but with greater uncertainty? , 2003, JAMA.

[19]  Jeffrey W Moses,et al.  Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  Sanjay Kaul,et al.  Prior convictions: Bayesian approaches to the analysis and interpretation of clinical megatrials. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[21]  R. Califf,et al.  Enoxaparin vs unfractionated heparin in high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes managed with an intended early invasive strategy: primary results of the SYNERGY randomized trial. , 2004, JAMA.

[22]  P. Rothwell.  Subgroup analysis in randomised controlled trials: importance, indications, and interpretation , 2005, The Lancet.

[23]  J. Tijssen,et al.  Early invasive versus selectively invasive management for acute coronary syndromes. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Validity of composite end points in clinical trials , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[25]  Marc A Pfeffer,et al.  The charisma of subgroups and the subgroups of CHARISMA. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[26]  J. Habbema,et al.  Subgroup analyses in therapeutic cardiovascular clinical trials: are most of them misleading? , 2006, American heart journal.

[27]  S. Lagakos.  The challenge of subgroup analyses--reporting without distorting. , 2006, The New England journal of medicine.

[28]  Stephen W Lagakos,et al.  Statistics in medicine--reporting of subgroup analyses in clinical trials. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[29]  E. Antman,et al.  Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. , 2007, The New England journal of medicine.

[30]  J. Gebel.  The CAPRIE-like subgroups of CHARISMA: a CAPRIEciously biased analysis of an unCHARISMAtic truth. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[31]  G. Guyatt,et al.  Methodologic discussions for using and interpreting composite endpoints are limited, but still identify major concerns. , 2007, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[32]  X. Álvarez,et al.  Clopidogrel and aspirin versus aspirin alone for the prevention of atherothrombotic events , 2007 .

[33]  Gordon H Guyatt,et al.  Problems with use of composite end points in cardiovascular trials: systematic review of randomised controlled trials , 2007, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[34]  E. Antman,et al.  A perspective on the efficacy and safety of intensive antiplatelet therapy in the trial to assess improvement in therapeutic outcomes by optimizing platelet inhibition with prasugrel-thrombolysis in myocardial infarction 38. , 2008, The American journal of cardiology.

[35]  E. Lesaffre.  Superiority, equivalence, and non-inferiority trials. , 2008, Bulletin of the NYU hospital for joint diseases.

[36]  Demosthenes B Panagiotakos,et al.  The Value of p-Value in Biomedical Research , 2008, The open cardiovascular medicine journal.

[37]  A. Rabinstein.  Patients With Prior Myocardial Infarction, Stroke, or Symptomatic Peripheral Arterial Disease in the CHARISMA Trial , 2008 .

[38]  D. Altman,et al.  Composite Outcomes in Cardiovascular Research: A Survey of Randomized Trials , 2008, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[39]  P. Teirstein.  Percutaneous Revascularization Is the Preferred Strategy for Patients With Significant Left Main Coronary Stenosis , 2009, Circulation.

[40]  B. Gersh,et al.  The Problem With Composite End Points in Cardiovascular Studies: The Story of Major Adverse Cardiac Events and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , 2009 .

[41]  Seung‐Jung Park,et al.  Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Stent Implantation Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Is It Time to Change Guidelines? , 2009, Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions.