<blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>Research Methods and Statistics is their strongest point but often ask wrong questions.<hr></blockquote>

I could not agree more wholeheartedly. This is not isolated. Physios are great at data collection but all to often the wrong questions are asked and even more unusualy conclusions are drawn.

If I remember correctly the terms are "operationalisation of the question". We did learn about this in my undergrad course at the University of Sydney. Unfortunately to often researches are not practising what is being preached to the undergrads! Let's continue to look at what appears to work and then try to find out why. If you break things up into small RCT's you often find things in isolation are not statictically significant. However without breaking them down to fit a homogeonous, double blind RCT many clinical approaches/applications still seem to have a positive effect or outcome. To me that would say that an RCT is not the correct measurement tool. <img border=0 src="http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/nerd.gif" />