Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Randomized control trials (RCTs) are considered the gold standard in the hierarchy of evidence based medicine. Guidelines and recommendations for clinical practice are based on the strength of evidence in this hierarchical tree. This article looks at the weakness of RCTs and variance between large pooled observational data and trial results for some of the historical trials in coronary artery disease. Observational studies can supplement data from resource intensive RCTs. Guidelines for reporting and analysis however need to be rigorous. It further discusses alternate systems of hierarchies as basis for recommendations.

Original publication




Journal article


Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther

Publication Date





155 - 162


Randomized control trials, coronary artery bypass surgery, coronary artery disease, observational studies, percutaneous intervention, Coronary Artery Disease, Evidence-Based Medicine, Humans, Observational Studies as Topic, Outcome Assessment (Health Care), Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic