Cargando…
An empirical comparison of the harmful effects for randomized controlled trials and non-randomized studies of interventions
Introduction: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard to evaluate the efficacy of interventions (e.g., drugs and vaccines), yet the sample size of RCTs is often limited for safety assessment. Non-randomized studies of interventions (NRSIs) had been proposed as an important alternat...
Autores principales: | Dai, Minhan, Furuya-Kanamori, Luis, Syed, Asma, Lin, Lifeng, Wang, Qiang |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10070801/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37025494 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2023.1064567 |
Ejemplares similares
-
Measuring the impact of zero-cases studies in evidence synthesis practice using the harms index and benefits index (Hi-Bi)
por: Xu, Chang, et al.
Publicado: (2023) -
Data extraction error in pharmaceutical versus non-pharmaceutical interventions for evidence synthesis: Study protocol for a crossover trial
por: Zhu, Yi, et al.
Publicado: (2023) -
Assessing Clinical Effects of Traditional Chinese Medicine Interventions: Moving Beyond Randomized Controlled Trials
por: Sun, Xin, et al.
Publicado: (2021) -
Utilization of the evidence from studies with no events in meta-analyses of adverse events: an empirical investigation
por: Xu, Chang, et al.
Publicado: (2021) -
Gynostemma pentaphyllum for dyslipidemia: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials
por: Dai, Ning, et al.
Publicado: (2022)