The use of a comparability scoring system in reporting observational studies

American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology

Volumn 210, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 112-116

  Vintzileos, Anthony M ^a   Ananth, Cande V ^b,c   Smulian, John C ^d,e  

^a WINTHROP UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b New York Presbyterian Columbia University Medical Center   (United States)

^c Department of Medicine   (United States)

^d LEHIGH VALLEY HOSPITAL   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

Author keywords

comparability; observational studies; scoring

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHECKLIST; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROL GROUP; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; SCORING SYSTEM; SELECTION BIAS; CLASSIFICATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT CARE; PROCEDURES;

CHECKLIST; CONTROL GROUPS; HUMANS; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY AS TOPIC; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT CARE; SELECTION BIAS;

EID: 84893033711     PISSN: 00029378     EISSN: 10976868     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajog.2013.09.002     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. R.K. Riegelman Studying a study and testing a test. How to read the medical evidence 5th ed. 2005 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Philadelphia, PA
2. US Department of Health and Human Services. Draft guidance for industry, clinical investigators, and Food and Drug Administration staff. Design considerations for pivotal clinical investigations for medical devices, Food and Drug Administration. Available document issued: Aug. 15, 2011. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/DeviceRegulationandGuidance/GuidanceDocuments/ ucm265553.htm/. Accessed March 19, 2013.
3. A.J. Barros, C. Ronsmans, and H. Axelson et al. Equity in maternal, newborn, and child health interventions in countdown to 2015: a retrospective review of survey data from 54 countries Lancet 379 2012 1225 1233
4. B.C. Lund, M.E. Charlton, M.A. Steinman, and P.J. Kaboli Regional differences in prescribing quality among elder veterans and the impact of rural residence J Rural Health 29 2013 172 179
5. K. McPherson, J.E. Wennberg, O.B. Hovind, and P. Clifford Small-area variations in the use of common surgical procedures: an international comparison of New England, England, and Norway N Engl J Med 307 1982 1310 1314 (Pubitemid 12005666)
6. A.K. Jha, J.B. Perlin, K.W. Kizer, and R.A. Dudley Effect of the transformation of the Veterans Affairs health care system on the quality of care N Engl J Med 348 2003 2218 2227 (Pubitemid 36618134)
7. N.L. Keating, M.B. Landrum, E.B. Lamont, S.R. Bozeman, and B.J. McNeil Area-level variations in cancer care and outcomes Med Care 50 2012 366 373
8. J.E. Wennberg Unwarranted variations in healthcare delivery: implications for academic medical centres BMJ 325 2002 961 964 (Pubitemid 35265218)
9. K.L. Madden, D. Turnbull, A.M. Cyna, P. Adelson, and C. Wilkinson Pain relief for childbirth: the preferences of pregnant women, midwives and obstetricians Women Birth 26 2013 33 40
10. M.S. Matthias The impact of uncertainty on decision making in prenatal consultations: obstetricians' and midwives' perspectives Health Commun 25 2010 199 211
11. M.C. Klein, J. Kaczorowski, and W.A. Hall et al. The attitudes of Canadian maternity care practitioners towards labour and birth: many differences but important similarities Obstet Gynaecol Can 31 2009 827 840
12. A.M. Walker Confounding by indication Epidemiology 7 1996 335 336
13. National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement Effect of corticosteroids for fetal maturation on perinatal outcomes, February 28-March 2, 1994 Am J Obstet Gynecol 173 1995 246 252
14. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Use of progesterone to reduce preterm birth. ACOG Committee Opinion no. 291 Obstet Gynecol 102 2003 1115 1116
15. A.M. Vintzileos, W.A. Campbell, D.A. Nochimson, M.E. Connolly, M.M. Fuenfer, and G.J. Hoehn The fetal biophysical profile in patients with premature rupture of the membranes: an early predictor of fetal infection Am J Obstet Gynecol 152 1985 510 516 (Pubitemid 15039825)
16. S.J. Feinstein, A.M. Vintzileos, J.G. Lodeiro, W.A. Campbell, P.J. Weinbaum, and D.J. Nochimson Amniocentesis with premature rupture of membranes Obstet Gynecol 68 1986 147 152 (Pubitemid 16038606)
17. A.M. Vintzileos, R. Bors-Koefoed, and J.F. Pelegano et al. The use of fetal biophysical profile improves pregnancy outcome in premature rupture of the membranes Am J Obstet Gynecol 157 1987 236 240
18. J.R. Desai, E.A. Bowen, M.M. Danielson, R.R. Allam, and M.N. Cantor Creation and implementation of a historical controls database from randomized clinical trials J Am Med Inform Assoc 20 2013 e162 e168
19. J.A. McPherson, L.M. Harper, A.O. Odibo, K.A. Roehl, and A.G. Cahill Maternal seizure disorder and risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes Am J Obstet Gynecol 208 2013 378.e1 378.e5
20. D. Baud, A. Lausman, and M.A. Alfaraj et al. Expectant management compared with elective delivery at 37 weeks for gastroschisis Obstet Gynecol 121 2013 990 998
21. K.F. Schulz, and D.A. Grimes Case-control studies: research in reverse Lancet 359 2002 431 434 (Pubitemid 34158958)