Comparison of retrospective vs clinical trial in Twin Block Functional
Research type
Research Study
Full title
A comparison of the results from a retrospective patient group and patients from a randomised controlled trial for the effectiveness of Twin Block functional appliance
IRAS ID
166813
Contact name
Lynne Macrae
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Manchester
Duration of Study in the UK
1 years, 11 months, 29 days
Research summary
Observational studies (including retrospective ones) have been believed to find different treatment effects than randomised, controlled trials. Several studies have suggested larger treatment effects in observational studies compared to randomised controlled trials. However, more recent studies have shown that randomised and non-randomised studies produce similar results with no major significant differences in treatment effects. In my study, I intend to find out whether retrospective studies produce similar results to clinical trials in the use of an appliance used to treat skeletal discrepancies (Twin Block functional appliance). Gold standard MOrth cases (cases that students have submitted to the Royal College of Surgeons for their exam) will be matched against the results from a randomised clinical trial (O’Brien, 2009) assessing the effectiveness of the use of Twin Block functional appliance.
REC name
Wales REC 7
REC reference
14/WA/1258
Date of REC Opinion
4 Dec 2014
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion