ReviewPostgraduate medical journal2004
How to assess epidemiological studies.
Review in Postgraduate medical journal, 2004. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Identifying the most important facilitators of open research data sharing and reuse in Epidemiology: A mixed-methods study.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- The effects of estradiol on mood and behavior in human female adolescents: a systematic review.European journal of pediatrics · 2015Pooled it
- The burden of diabetes mellitus during pregnancy in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.Global health action · 2014Pooled it
- A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of factors associated with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus colonization at time of hospital or intensive care unit admission.Infection control and hospital epidemiology · 2013Pooled it
- Epidemiology and associated injuries in paediatric diaphyseal femur fractures treated at a limited resource zonal referral hospital in northern Tanzania.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2022Article
- Household Tenure and Its Associations with Multiple Long-Term Conditions amongst Working-Age Adults in East London: A Cross-Sectional Analysis Using Linked Primary Care and Local Government Records.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Algorithm for sample availability prediction in a hospital-based epidemiological study spreadsheet-based sample availability calculator.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Reproductive Health Risks Associated with Occupational and Environmental Exposure to Pesticides.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Review
- The statistical importance of P-POSSUM scores for predicting mortality after emergency laparotomy in geriatric patients.BMC medical informatics and decision making · 2020Article
- Digital Epidemiology: Use of Digital Data Collected for Non-epidemiological Purposes in Epidemiological Studies.Healthcare informatics research · 2018Review
- What Are the Net Benefits of Reducing the Ozone Standard to 65 ppb? An Alternative Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Review
- Physical Activity in Preventing Alzheimer's Disease and Cognitive Decline: A Narrative Review.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2018Review
- Addressing Bias in Electronic Health Record-Based Surveillance of Cardiovascular Disease Risk: Finding the Signal Through the Noise.Current epidemiology reports · 2017Article
- Do people with risky behaviours participate in biomedical cohort studies?BMC public health · 2006Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Assessing the quality of an epidemiological study equates to assessing whether the inferences drawn from it are warranted when account is taken of the methods, the representativeness of the study sample, and the nature of the population from which it is drawn. Bias, confounding, and chance can threaten the quality of an epidemiological study at all its phases. Nevertheless, their presence does not necessarily imply that a study should be disregarded. The reader must first balance any of these threats or missing information with their potential impact on the conclusions of the report.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.