A bias in the evaluation of bias comparing randomized trials with nonexperimental studies

Epidemiologic Methods

Volumn 6, Issue 1, 2017, Pages

  Franklin, Jessica M ^a   Dejene, Sara ^a   Huybrechts, Krista F ^a   Wang, Shirley V ^a   Kulldorff, Martin ^a   Rothman, Kenneth J ^b,c  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b RTI INTERNATIONAL   (United States)

^c BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

bias; meta analysis; observational studies; randomized trials; routinely collected data

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; ODDS RATIO; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROPENSITY SCORE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); STATISTICAL BIAS;

EID: 85062114271     PISSN: 21949263     EISSN: 2161962X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1515/em-2016-0018     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Anglemyer, A., Horvath, H. T., and Bero, L. (2014). Healthcare outcomes assessed with observational study designs compared with those assessed in randomized trials. In Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, The Cochrane Collaboration (ed.). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/14651858.MR000034.pub2. (Accessed May 12, 2016
2. Benchimol, E. I., Smeeth, L., Guttmann, A., et al. (2015). The REporting of studies Conducted using Observational Routinelycollected health Data (RECORD) statement. Plos Medicine, 12(10): e1001885
3. Benson, K., and Hartz, A. J. (2000). A comparison of observational studies, and randomized, controlled trials. The New England Journal of Medicine, 342(25): 1878-1886
4. Beynon, R., Harris, R., and Sterne, J. 2008. The quantification of bias in randomised, and non-randomised studies: The BRANDO NRS Study [poster]. 16th Cochrane Colloquium. Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany
5. Bhandari, M., Tornetta III, P., Ellis, T., et al. (2004). Hierarchy of evidence: Differences in results between non-randomized studies, and randomized trials in patients with femoral neck fractures. Archives Orthopedic Trauma Surgery, 124(1): 10-16
6. Black, N. (1996). Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health care. BMJ, 312(7040): 1215
7. Concato, J., Shah, N., and Horwitz, R. I. (2000). Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. The New England Journal of Medicine, 342(25): 1887-1892
8. De Lusignan, S., and Van Weel, C. (2006). The use of routinely collected computer data for research in primary care: Opportunities, and challenges. Family Practical, 23(2): 253-263
9. Dreyer, N. A., Tunis, S. R., Berger, M., et al. (2010). Why observational studies should be among the tools used in comparative effectiveness research. Health Affairs (Millwood), 29(10): 1818-1825
10. Furlan, A. D., Tomlinson, G., Jadad, A. A. R., et al. (2008). Examining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: Comparing results of randomized trials, and nonrandomized studies of interventions for low back pain. Spine, 33(3): 339-348
11. Glynn, R., Schneeweiss, S., Wang, P., et al. (2006). Selective prescribing led to overestimation of the benefits of lipid-lowering drugs. Journal Clinical Epidemiology, 59(8): 819-828
12. Glynn, R. J., Knight, E. L., Levin, R., et al. (2001). Paradoxical relations of drug treatment with mortality in older persons. Epidemiology, 12(6): 682-689
13. Goldberg, N. H., Schneeweiss, S., Kowal, M. K., et al. (2011). Availability of comparative efficacy data at the time of drug approval in the United States. JAMA, 305(17): 1786-1789
14. Hankins, M. C., Buysse, B., Chatzitheofilou, I., et al. (2016). Re: Agreement of treatment effects for mortality from routinely collected data, and subsequent randomized trials: meta-epidemiological survey. The BMJ, http://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.i493/rr-1. (Accessed May 17, 2016
15. Hemkens, L. G., Contopoulos-Ioannidis, D. G., and Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2016). Agreement of treatment effects for mortality from routinely collected data, and subsequent randomized trials: Meta-epidemiological survey. BMJ, 352: i493
16. Ioannidis, J. P. (2005). Why most published research findings are false. Plos Medicine, 2(8): e124
17. Knol, M. J., Le Cessie, S., Algra, A., et al. (2012). Overestimation of risk ratios by odds ratios in trials, and cohort studies: Alternatives to logistic regression. Canada Medica Association Journal, 184(8): 895-899
18. Powell, A. E., Davies, H. T. O., and Thomson, R. G. (2003). Using routine comparative data to assess the quality of health care: Understanding, and avoiding common pitfalls. Qualitative Safety Health Care, 12(2): 122-128
19. Rothman, K. J., Greenland, S., and Lash, T. L. (2008). Modern Epidemiology. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Philadelphia, PA
20. Schenker, N., and Gentleman, J. F. (2001). On judging the significance of differences by examining the overlap between confidence intervals. American Statistical, 55(3): 182-186
21. Schneeweiss, S., and Avorn, J. (2005). A review of uses of health care utilization databases for epidemiologic research on therapeutics. Journal Clinical Epidemiology, 58(4): 323-337
22. Schulz, K. F., Chalmers, I., Hayes, R. J., et al. (1995). Empirical evidence of bias: Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. JAMA, 273(5): 408-412
23. Suissa, S. (2016). Re: Agreement of treatment effects for mortality from routinely collected data, and subsequent randomized trials: Meta-epidemiological survey. The BMJ, http://www.bmj.com/content/352/bmj.i493/rr-3). (Accessed May 17, 2016
24. Sullivan, P., and Goldmann, D. (2011). The promise of comparative effectiveness research. JAMA, 305(4): 400-401
25. Wu, C., Hannan, E. L., Walford, G., et al. (2008). Utilization, and outcomes of unprotected left main coronary artery stenting, and coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 86(4): 1153-1159