A Comparison of Observational Studies and Randomized, Controlled Trials
Top Cited Papers
- 22 June 2000
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Massachusetts Medical Society in New England Journal of Medicine
- Vol. 342 (25) , 1878-1886
- https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm200006223422506
Abstract
For many years it has been claimed that observational studies find stronger treatment effects than randomized, controlled trials. We compared the results of observational studies with those of randomized, controlled trials.Keywords
This publication has 67 references indexed in Scilit:
- Comparison of pneumatic retinopexy and scleral buckling in the management of primary rhegmatogenous retinal detachmentAmerican Journal of Ophthalmology, 1998
- The Cochrane Collaboration-Advances and Challenges in Improving Evidence-based Decision MakingMedical Decision Making, 1998
- Superior compliance and efficacy of continuous combined oral estrogen-progestogen replacement therapy in postmenopausal womenAmerican Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 1995
- Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trialsJAMA, 1995
- Laparoscopic Versus Conventional AppendectomyAnnals of Surgery, 1993
- A clinical trial on the effects of a combination of elcatonin (Carbocalcitonin) and conjugated estrogens on vertebral bone mass in early postmenopausal womenCalcified Tissue International, 1993
- Mortality after coronary angioplasty and coronary artery bypass surgery (the national Medicare experience)The American Journal of Cardiology, 1992
- Risk of Leukemia after Chemotherapy and Radiation Treatment for Breast CancerNew England Journal of Medicine, 1992
- Bias in Treatment Assignment in Controlled Clinical TrialsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1983
- Evidence Favoring the Use of Anticoagulants in the Hospital Phase of Acute Myocardial InfarctionNew England Journal of Medicine, 1977