Literature DB >> 22065658

Why do the results of randomised and observational studies differ?

Jan P Vandenbroucke.   

Abstract

Mesh：

Substances：

Year:  2011        PMID： 22065658     DOI： 10.1136/bmj.d7020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  BMJ        ISSN： 0959-8138


× No keyword cloud information.
  17 in total

1.  Digoxin and mortality: lessons for observational studies.

Authors:  Anthonius de Boer; Adam F Cohen
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2015-11-20       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  Evaluating the impact of database heterogeneity on observational study results.

Authors:  David Madigan; Patrick B Ryan; Martijn Schuemie; Paul E Stang; J Marc Overhage; Abraham G Hartzema; Marc A Suchard; William DuMouchel; Jesse A Berlin
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2013-05-05       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  A large prospective European cohort study of patients treated with strontium ranelate and followed up over 3 years.

Authors:  M Audran; F J Jakob; S Palacios; M-L Brandi; H Bröll; N A T Hamdy; E V McCloskey
Journal:  Rheumatol Int       Date:  2013-03-02       Impact factor: 2.631

4.  Cerebral microbleeds on magnetic resonance imaging and anticoagulant-associated intracerebral hemorrhage risk.

Authors:  Andreas Charidimou; Clare Shakeshaft; David J Werring
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 4.003

5.  Classification and prevalence of spin in abstracts of non-randomized studies evaluating an intervention.

Authors:  Clément Lazarus; Romana Haneef; Philippe Ravaud; Isabelle Boutron
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2015-10-13       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 6.  Using multiple types of studies in systematic reviews of health care interventions--a systematic review.

Authors:  Frank Peinemann; Doreen Allen Tushabe; Jos Kleijnen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-12-26       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Interpretation of Results of Studies Evaluating an Intervention Highlighted in Google Health News: A Cross-Sectional Study of News.

Authors:  Romana Haneef; Clement Lazarus; Philippe Ravaud; Amélie Yavchitz; Isabelle Boutron
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-16       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Meta-analysis shows clinically relevant and long-lasting deterioration in health-related quality of life after esophageal cancer surgery.

Authors:  M Jacobs; R C Macefield; R G Elbers; K Sitnikova; I J Korfage; E M A Smets; I Henselmans; M I van Berge Henegouwen; J C J M de Haes; J M Blazeby; M A G Sprangers
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2013-12-03       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 9.  Treatment outcomes of treatment-naïve Hepatitis C patients co-infected with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational cohorts.

Authors:  Anna Davies; Kasha P Singh; Zara Shubber; Philipp Ducros; Edward J Mills; Graham Cooke; Nathan Ford
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-02-05       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Antiplatelets versus anticoagulants for the treatment of cervical artery dissection: Bayesian meta-analysis.

Authors:  Hakan Sarikaya; Bruno R da Costa; Ralf W Baumgartner; Kathleen Duclos; Emmanuel Touzé; Jean M de Bray; Antti Metso; Tiina Metso; Marcel Arnold; Antonio Arauz; Marcel Zwahlen; Peter Jüni
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-09-05       Impact factor: 3.240
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.