Randomization - There is no substitute

JAMA Cardiology

Volumn 1, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 633-635

  Fonarow, Gregg C ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^b UCLA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CLOPIDOGREL; PRASUGREL;

ACUTE HEART INFARCTION; BLEEDING; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CARDIOVASCULAR RISK; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; DATA PROCESSING; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; EDITORIAL; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HUMAN; INTERNAL VALIDITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; METHODOLOGY;

RANDOM ALLOCATION; RESEARCH DESIGN;

EID: 85030784708     PISSN: 23806583     EISSN: 23806591     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2016.1792     Document Type: Editorial

References (14)

1. Guyatt GH, Haynes RB, Jaeschke RZ, et al; Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature, XXV: evidence-based medicine: principles for applying the Users’ Guides to patient care. JAMA. 2000;284 (10):1290-1296.
2. Rothwell PM. External validity of randomised controlled trials: “to whom do the results of this trial apply?” Lancet. 2005;365(9453):82-93.
3. Van Spall HG, Toren A, Kiss A, Fowler RA. Eligibility criteria of randomized controlled trials published in high-impact general medical journals: a systematic sampling review. JAMA. 2007;297(11): 1233-1240.
4. Sox HC, Greenfield S. Comparative effectiveness research: a report from the Institute of Medicine. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151(3):203-205.
5. Shah BR, Drozda J, Peterson ED. Leveraging observational registries to inform comparative effectiveness research. Am Heart J. 2010;160(1): 8-15.
6. D’Agostino RB Jr. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med. 1998;17 (19):2265-2281.
7. Austin PC, Mamdani MM, Stukel TA, Anderson GM, Tu JV. The use of the propensity score for estimating treatment effects: administrative versus clinical data. Stat Med. 2005;24(10):1563-1578.
8. Angrist JD, Imbens GW, Rubin DB. Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables. J Am Stat Assoc. 1996;91(434):444-455.
9. McClellan M, McNeil BJ, Newhouse JP. Does more intensive treatment of acute myocardial infarction in the elderly reduce mortality? analysis using instrumental variables. JAMA. 1994;272(11): 859-866.
10. Stukel TA, Fisher ES, Wennberg DE, Alter DA, Gottlieb DJ, Vermeulen MJ. Analysis of observational studies in the presence of treatment selection bias: effects of invasive cardiac management on AMI survival using propensity score and instrumental variable methods. JAMA. 2007;297(3):278-285.
11. Wiviott SD, Braunwald E, McCabe CH, et al; TRITON-TIMI 38 Investigators. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(20):2001-2015.
12. Federspiel JJ, Anstrom KJ, Xian Y, et al; Treatment With Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors–Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events After Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRANSLATE-ACS) Investigators. Comparing inverse probability of treatment weighting and instrumental variable methods for the evaluation of adenosine diphosphate receptor inhibitors after percutaneous coronary intervention [published online July 20, 2016]. JAMA Cardiol. doi: 10.1001/jamacardio.2016.1783.
13. Chin CT, Wang TY, Anstrom KJ, et al. Treatment With Adenosine Diphosphate Receptor Inhibitors–Longitudinal Assessment of Treatment Patterns and Events After Acute Coronary Syndrome (TRANSLATE-ACS) study design: expanding the paradigm of longitudinal observational research. Am Heart J. 2011;162(5):844-851.
14. Prasad V, Jena AB. Prespecified falsification end points: can they validate true observational associations? JAMA. 2013;309(3):241-242.