Bias versus causality: Interpreting recent evidence of oral contraceptive studies
Open Access
- 1 September 1998
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Elsevier in American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
- Vol. 179 (3) , s43-s50
- https://doi.org/10.1053/ob.1998.v179.a93059
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 27 references indexed in Scilit:
- Oral contraceptives and venous thrombosis: different sensitivities to activated protein C in women using second‐ and third‐generation oral contraceptivesBritish Journal of Haematology, 1997
- Appetite-Suppressant Drugs and the Risk of Primary Pulmonary HypertensionNew England Journal of Medicine, 1996
- Stroke in Users of Low-Dose Oral ContraceptivesNew England Journal of Medicine, 1996
- A comparative study of the effects of the hemostatic system of two monophasic gestodene oral contraceptives containing 20 μg and 30 μg ethinylestradiolContraception, 1996
- Effect of different progestagens in low oestrogen oral contraceptives on venous thromboembolic diseaseThe Lancet, 1995
- Risk of idiopathic cardiovascular death and rionfatal venous thromboembolism in women using oral contraceptives with differing progestagen componentsThe Lancet, 1995
- Oral contraception and risk of a cerebral thromboembolic attack: results of a case-control study.BMJ, 1993
- A concurrent cohort study of oral contraceptive users from the VAMP research bankPharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safety, 1993
- The Use of β-Agonists and the Risk of Death and near Death from AsthmaNew England Journal of Medicine, 1992
- A Dictionary of EpidemiologyInternational Journal of Epidemiology, 1986