Practical examples: trials and conclusions -- an interactive segment.

Abstract

There is a requirement for a critical review of the literature published in the field of reflux disease management, particularly when the literature is used as a basis for the adoption of specific interventions into everyday practice. Numerous published studies are valid and robust, but many are not. Particularly common is the over-interpretation of positive studies based on small patient numbers, which may be subject to publication bias. Claims of equivalence are invalid without a pre-specified level of equivalence and adequate power to measure this. More generally, a lack of pre-defined primary end-points, clinically relevant and measured appropriately, is a common feature of reflux trial methodology.