On #Red4Research Day, visit my website at JamesLindLibrary.org to learn about the development of fair tests of treatment through history

6/8 In the 5 weeks after randomisation, there were 804 (9.4%) vascular deaths among 8587 patients allocated aspirin but 1016 (11.8%) in 8600 allocated placebo. The odds of dying in the 5 weeks after their MI were reduced by about a quarter if patients were given 160mg aspirin a day for a month.

#TrialsTuesday #9 In recent weeks, Trials Tuesday has highlighted some small, practice changing trials. In contrast, today’s trial is one that was described as “massive” by Keith Veronese in Making Medicine. It was called ISIS-2. 1/8

The proposal for this trial was by Joan Baptista van Helmont, born in Brussels in 1579. It was published in 1648 (after his death) by his son, Franciscus Mercurius van Helmont (www.jameslindlibrary.org/van-helmont-...) 2/8

#TrialsTuesday #5. Gold featured as an ineffective treatment for tuberculosis in the last TrialsTuesday. This week, I feature a person who shares the name of the element - Harry Gold – and the history of the "double blind" trial 1/8 #DoubleBlind

To learn more about these trialists, have a look at my article about James Burns Amberson (pictured), written by Mireya Diaz (www.jameslindlibrary.org/articles/jam...) and the one by Sue Boren for his co-author on the 1931 paper, Max Pinner (www.jameslindlibrary.org/articles/max...) 8/8

The trial was celebrated in a 50th anniversary issue of the BMJ on 31 October 1998 in which the Editor’s Choice began “Was the randomised controlled trial the most important development in medicine this century? Some say yes. Others scoff.” www.bmj.com/content/317/... 7/8

#TrialsTuesday #1 Starting today, every Tuesday here in Bluesky, I’ll tell you about an important clinical trial. Where better to begin than with my own study of treatments for scurvy on board the gun ship, Salisbury 1/8

4) Serving Patients

We must never forget that evidence must serve the interests of patients.

This includes effective prioritisation, systematic summaries, transparent reporting and judicious use of its findings.

www.jameslindlibrary.org/research-top...

3) The Play of Chance

When treatments are compared, any differences in outcome events may simply reflect the play of chance.

Investigate the evolution of methods of quantifying uncertainty and meta-analysis.

www.jameslindlibrary.org/research-top...

2) Biases

Biases in tests of treatments are those influences and factors that can lead to conclusions about treatment effects that are systematically different from the truth.

You can focus on different types of bias, from Design Bias to Reporting Bias.

www.jameslindlibrary.org/research-top...

We have four main sections:

1) Fair Tests of Treatments

Despite acting with the best of intentions, health professionals have sometimes done more harm than good to the patients.

This section is about why we need fair tests to address uncertainty.

www.jameslindlibrary.org/research-top...

Hail and well met!

Changing ships mid voyage is always tricky. We are moving here from X, like everyone else.

I was lucky to have three different ships in which to compare the effects of treatments for scurvy.

I will be posting about the history of fair tests of treatments.

jameslindlibrary.org