Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

There is at present some confusion about the relative value of clinical trials performed to investigate efficacy vs. those designed to investigate effectiveness. This is particularly challenging when studies performed as experiments for regulators by companies are used to shape and inform clinical practice, especially if studies conducted under more real life conditions fail to support predicted benefits. We review the field in relation to the new antipsychotics, in particular. Other indications, including mood disorders, which are also briefly touched upon, have so far received less definitive attention, but are likely to encounter the same difficulties. We conclude that, where the results of efficacy trials are positive and an effectiveness trial is negative, one should not necessarily prefer the effectiveness trial - it may simply have failed. Where efficacy trials and effectiveness trials point to similar conclusions, then the findings are mutually supportive.

Type

Journal article

Journal

World Psychiatry

Publication Date

02/2009

Volume

8

Pages

23 - 27

Keywords

Clinical trials, antidepressants, antipsychotics, bipolar disorder, depression, effectiveness, efficacy, methodology, mood disorders, mood stabilizers, pragmatic trials, schizophrenia