UCSF

BACKGROUND:In a 2003 paper in BMJ, the authors made the tongue-in-cheek observation that there are no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of parachutes. This paper has been widely read, cited and used to argue that RCTs are impractical or unnecessary for some medical practices. We performed a study to identify and evaluate claims that a medical practice is akin to a parachute. METHODS:Using Google Scholar, we identified all citations to the 2003 paper. We searched for claims that a specific practice was akin to a parachute. For each practice, we identified the desired outcome of the practice, and searched Google Scholar and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs that were conducted, ongoing, halted, planned or unpublished. RESULTS:Of 822 articles citing the original paper, 35 (4.1%) argued that a medical practice was akin to a parachute. Eighteen of the 35 (51%) concerned mortality or live birth, and 17 (49%) concerned a lesser outcome. For 22 practices (63%), we identified 1 or more RCTs: in 6 cases (27%), the trials showed a statistically significant benefit of the practice; in 5 (23%), the trials rejected the practice; in 5 (23%), the trials had mixed results; in 2 (9%), the trials were halted; and in 4 (18%), the trials were ongoing. Effect size was calculated for 5 of the 6 practices for which RCTs gave positive results, and the absolute risk reduction ranged from 11% to 30.8%, corresponding to a number needed to treat of 3-9. INTERPRETATION:Although there is widespread interest regarding the BMJ paper arguing that randomized trials are not necessary for practices of clear benefit, there are few analogies in medicine. Most parachute analogies in medicine are inappropriate, incorrect or misused.