Pulmonary embolism is a life-threatening condition that often requires more than anticoagulation. Invasive therapies hold promise but must be held to rigorous standards
Is there any way we can ask our colleagues to stop this trend of standing ovations for trials? Most of the positive trials these days are incremental (and many are worse). Sure the teams should be proud of what they are doing, and I commend them for working on the trials, but it is turning out profession into a circus/clown show. Let's get back to serious science please.
Medicine really needs you and your careful and honest evaluation when industry and over enthusiastic investigators are so keen to ignore the real facts and just sell a new procedure or in this case an expensive device. As with the Left atrial plugs this technique will be adopted by enthusiasts despite the lack of evidence - again the real evidence is that it probably does more harm than good. One hopes that NICE in the U.K. will evaluate with more care and avoid giving it a licence.
Is there any way we can ask our colleagues to stop this trend of standing ovations for trials? Most of the positive trials these days are incremental (and many are worse). Sure the teams should be proud of what they are doing, and I commend them for working on the trials, but it is turning out profession into a circus/clown show. Let's get back to serious science please.
Medicine really needs you and your careful and honest evaluation when industry and over enthusiastic investigators are so keen to ignore the real facts and just sell a new procedure or in this case an expensive device. As with the Left atrial plugs this technique will be adopted by enthusiasts despite the lack of evidence - again the real evidence is that it probably does more harm than good. One hopes that NICE in the U.K. will evaluate with more care and avoid giving it a licence.
Another excellent analysis of a "positive" clinical trial highly relevant to clinical practice. Thank you.