Indirect Comparison in Evaluating Relative Efficacy Illustrated by Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Colorectal Surgery
- 29 September 2000
- journal article
- Published by Elsevier in Controlled Clinical Trials
- Vol. 21 (5) , 488-497
- https://doi.org/10.1016/s0197-2456(00)00055-6
Abstract
No abstract availableKeywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trialsBMJ, 1998
- Antimicrobial prophylaxis in colorectal surgery: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials.Health Technology Assessment, 1998
- The results of direct and indirect treatment comparisons in meta-analysis of randomized controlled trialsPublished by Elsevier ,1997
- Why we need observational studies to evaluate the effectiveness of health careBMJ, 1996
- An observer blind trial of co-amoxiclav versus cefuroxime plus metronidazole in the prevention of postoperative wound infection after general surgeryJournal of Hospital Infection, 1994
- Amoxycillin and Clavulanic Acid versus Cefotaxime and Metronidazole as Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Elective Colorectal Resectional SurgeryChemotherapy, 1993
- Single dose cefotaxime plus metronidazole versus three dose cefuroxime plus metronidazole as prophylaxis against wound infection in colorectal surgery: multicentre prospective randomised study.BMJ, 1990
- Randomisation and baseline comparisons in clinical trialsThe Lancet, 1990
- A prospective randomized trial to compare triple dose mezlocillin with triple dose cefuroxime plus metronidazole as prophylaxis in colorectal surgeryJournal of Hospital Infection, 1988
- A trial of mezlocillin versus cefuroxime with or without metronidazole for the prevention of wound sepsis after biliary and gastrointestinal surgeryJournal of Hospital Infection, 1988