This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.
In their update to the AAN's statement on research ethics, Tolchin et al.1 provided a thoughtful consideration of how to do clinical research but say little about when or why to conduct a randomized clinical trial (RCT). The 7-step criteria put forward by Emanuel et al.2—and on which the statement is based—speaks to this issue indirectly, but we suggest going even further. The AAN statement provides a valuable opportunity to mandate that the ethical justification for neurologic RCTs be explicit and codified. Specifically, we have proposed that RCTs be conducted only if there is uncertainty surrounding a clear hypothesis as explicitly demonstrated through a systematic review.3 Moreover, we have shown this standard is rarely met.4 We believe this issue is of pressing importance, especially in the era of COVID-19. For example, medicine has been challenged by unfounded claims about the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19,5 which has provoked calls for RCTs. Researchers have responded: a search of clinicialtrials.gov reveals 133 active or upcoming trials. Are all these trials necessary? Are any? Hydroxychloroquine has significant risks. Without transparent and codified standards for determining when RCTs should be performed, patients will suffer from being recruited into useless, redundant, or harmful trials.
Footnotes
Author disclosures are available upon request (journal{at}neurology.org).
- © 2021 American Academy of Neurology
AAN Members
We have changed the login procedure to improve access between AAN.com and the Neurology journals. If you are experiencing issues, please log out of AAN.com and clear history and cookies. (For instructions by browser, please click the instruction pages below). After clearing, choose preferred Journal and select login for AAN Members. You will be redirected to a login page where you can log in with your AAN ID number and password. When you are returned to the Journal, your name should appear at the top right of the page.
AAN Non-Member Subscribers
Purchase access
Disputes & Debates: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.