Cargando…
Bridging case-control studies and randomized trials
Randomized trials and observational studies, such as case-control studies, are often seen as opposing approaches. However, in many instances results obtained by different designs may complement each other. For instance, case-control studies on aetiology of disease may help to give the direction of f...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2001
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC59634/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11806781 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cvm-2-3-109 |
_version_ | 1782120090285637632 |
---|---|
author | Rosendaal, Frits R |
author_facet | Rosendaal, Frits R |
author_sort | Rosendaal, Frits R |
collection | PubMed |
description | Randomized trials and observational studies, such as case-control studies, are often seen as opposing approaches. However, in many instances results obtained by different designs may complement each other. For instance, case-control studies on aetiology of disease may help to give the direction of future trials. In this commentary, the author discusses the purpose of randomization and observation, and under which conditions one design may be preferred to another. Randomization is useful to combat 'confounding by indication', and is therefore the design of choice for most therapeutic trials. When this confounding is not an issue, as in studies of genetic risk factors or side-effects, then case-control studies are preferred. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-59634 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2001 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-596342001-11-06 Bridging case-control studies and randomized trials Rosendaal, Frits R Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med Commentary Randomized trials and observational studies, such as case-control studies, are often seen as opposing approaches. However, in many instances results obtained by different designs may complement each other. For instance, case-control studies on aetiology of disease may help to give the direction of future trials. In this commentary, the author discusses the purpose of randomization and observation, and under which conditions one design may be preferred to another. Randomization is useful to combat 'confounding by indication', and is therefore the design of choice for most therapeutic trials. When this confounding is not an issue, as in studies of genetic risk factors or side-effects, then case-control studies are preferred. BioMed Central 2001 2001-05-31 /pmc/articles/PMC59634/ /pubmed/11806781 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cvm-2-3-109 Text en Copyright © 2001 BioMed Central Ltd |
spellingShingle | Commentary Rosendaal, Frits R Bridging case-control studies and randomized trials |
title | Bridging case-control studies and randomized trials |
title_full | Bridging case-control studies and randomized trials |
title_fullStr | Bridging case-control studies and randomized trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Bridging case-control studies and randomized trials |
title_short | Bridging case-control studies and randomized trials |
title_sort | bridging case-control studies and randomized trials |
topic | Commentary |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC59634/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11806781 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/cvm-2-3-109 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rosendaalfritsr bridgingcasecontrolstudiesandrandomizedtrials |