Why do the results of randomised and observational studies differ? Statistical theory conflicts with empirical findings in several areas of research

BMJ (Online)

Volumn 343, Issue 7834, 2011, Pages 1128-

  Vandenbroucke, Jan P ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOLOGICAL MARKER;

ADVERSE DRUG REACTION; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; CLINICAL RESEARCH; DISEASE MARKER; EDITORIAL; HORMONE SUBSTITUTION; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RISK FACTOR; SIMULATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; EPIDEMIOLOGY; NOTE; OBSERVATION;

BIOLOGICAL MARKERS; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES; EPIDEMIOLOGIC STUDIES; HUMANS; OBSERVATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC;

EID: 82755165041     PISSN: 09598146     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.d7020     Document Type: Editorial

References (12)

1. Tzoulaki I, Siontis KCM, Ioannidis JPA. Prognostic effect size of cardiovascular biomarkers in datasets from observational studies versus randomised trials: meta-epidemiology study. BMJ 2011;343:d6829.
2. Shrier I, Boivin JF, Steele RJ, Platt RW, Furlan A, Kakuma R, et al. Should meta-analyses of interventions include observational studies in addition to randomized controlled trials? A critical examination of underlying principles. Am J Epidemiol 2007;166:1203-9. (Pubitemid 350022749)
3. Sacks H, Chalmers TC, Smith H Jr. Randomized versus historical controls for clinical trials. Am J Med 1982;72:233-40. (Pubitemid 12191842)
4. Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D'Amico R, Kunst H, Gibson A, Cummins E, et al. Evaluating nonrandomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess 2003;7:iii-173.
5. Glasziou P, Chalmers I, Rawlins M, McCulloch P. When are randomised trials unnecessary? Picking signal from noise. BMJ 2007;334:349-51. (Pubitemid 46328045)
6. Lawlor DA, Davey Smith G, Kundu D, Bruckdorfer KR, Ebrahim S. Those confounded vitamins: what can we learn from the differences between observational versus randomised trial evidence? Lancet 2004;363:1724-7. (Pubitemid 38670332)
7. Vandenbroucke JP. The HRT controversy: observational studies and RCTs fall in line. Lancet 2009;373:1233-5.
8. Vandenbroucke JP, Psaty BM. Benefits and risks of drug treatments: how to combine the best evidence on benefits with the best data about adverse effects. JAMA 2008;300:2417-9.
9. Papanikolaou PN, Christidi GD, Ioannidis JP. Comparison of evidence on harms of medical interventions in randomized and nonrandomized studies. CMAJ 2006;174:635-41. (Pubitemid 43341873)
10. Golder S, Loke YK, Bland M. Meta-analyses of adverse effects data derived from randomised controlled trials as compared to observational studies: methodological overview. PLoS Med 2011;8:e1001026.
11. Rothwell PM. External validity of randomised controlled trials: 'to whom do the results of this trial apply?' Lancet 2005;365:82-93. (Pubitemid 40082150)
12. Steg PG, Lopez-Sendon J, Lopez de Sa E, Goodman SG, Gore JM, Anderson FA Jr, et al. External validity of clinical trials in acute myocardial infarction. Arch Intern Med 2007;167:68-73.