Släng inte ut observations-studier med badvattnet: Bedöm deras kvalitet i stället

Lakartidningen

Volumn 105, Issue 45, 2008, Pages 3191-3194

  Rosén, Måns ^a,b   Axelsson, Susanna ^a   Lindblom, Jonas ^a  

^a Statens Beredning För Medicinsk Utvärdering ^*

^b Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CLINICAL TRIAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; EPIDEMIOLOGY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; OBSERVATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RISK FACTOR; SOCIOECONOMICS; STANDARD;

CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; COHORT STUDIES; EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; OBSERVATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RESEARCH DESIGN; RISK FACTORS; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS;

EID: 56649120526     PISSN: 00237205     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Sacks H, Chalmers TC, Smith H Jr. Randomized versus historical controls for clinical trials. Am J Med. 1982;72:233-40.
2. Benson K, Hartz AJ. A comparison of observational studies and randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1878-86.
3. Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz RI. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1887-92.
4. Ioannidis JP, Haidich AB, Pappa M, Pantazis N, Kokori SI, Tektonidou MG, et al. Comparison of evidence of treatment effects in randomized and nonrandomized studies. JAMA. 2001;286:821-30.
5. Kunz R, Vist G, Oxman AD. Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(2):MR000012.
6. McKee M, Britton A, Black N, McPherson K, Sanderson C, Bain C. Interpreting the evidence: choosing between randomised and nonrandomised studies. BMJ. 1999;319:312-5.
7. Worall J. Why there's no cause to randomize. Br J Philos Sci. 2007;58:451-88.
8. Mulrow CD. Systematic reviews: rationale for systematic reviews. BMJ. 1994;309:597-9.
9. Mangano DT, Tudor JC, Dietzel C. The risk associated with aprotonin in cardiac surgery. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:353-65.
10. Henry DA, Carless PA, Moxey AJ, O'Connell D, Stokes BJ, McClelland B, et al. Anti-fibrinolytic use for minimising perioperative allogenic blood transfusion. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(4):CD001886.
11. Schneeweiss S, Seeger JD, Landon J, Walker AM. Aprotinin during coronary-artery bypass grafting and risk of death. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:771-83.
12. Shaw AD, Stafford-Smith M, White WD, Phillips-Bute B, Swaminathan M, Milano C, et al. The effect of aprotinin on outcome after coronary-artery bypass grafting. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:784-93.
13. Humphrey LL, Chan BKS, Sox HC. Postmenopausal hormone replacement therapy and the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:273-84.
14. Lawlor DA, Davey Smith G, Brucksdorfer KR, Kundu D, Ebrahim S. Those confounded vitamins: what can we learn from the differences between observational versus randomised trial evidence? Lancet. 2004;363:1724-7.
15. Ringbäck Weitoft G, Ericsson Ö, Löfroth E, Rosén M. Equal access to treatment? Population-based follow-up of drugs dispensed to patients after acute myocardial infarction in Sweden. Eur J Clin Pharmacology. 2008;64(4):417-24.
16. Haglund B, Köster M, Rosén M. Inequality in access to coronary revascularisation in Sweden. Scand Cardiovasc J. 2004;38:334-9.
17. Madsen KM, Hviid A, Vestergaard M, Schendel D, Wohlfahrt J, Thorsen P, et al. A population-based study of measles, mumps, and rubella vaccination and autism. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1477-82.
18. Vandenbroucke JP. When are observational studies as credible as randomised trials? Lancet. 2004;363:1728-31.
19. Des Jarlais DC, Lyles C, Crepaz N; TREND group. Improving the reporting quality of nonrandomized evaluations of behavioral and public health interventions: the TREND statement. Am J Public Health. 2004;94:361-6.
20. Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, Eccles M, Falck-Ytter Y, Flottorp S, et al; GRADE Working Group. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328:1490.