Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26150125›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Rheumatology2015

Epidemiology research in rheumatology-progress and pitfalls.

Deborah P M Symmons

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Rheumatology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Deborah P M SymmonsArthritis Research UK Centre for Epidemiology, Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epidemiology research is a vital component of clinical studies in all medical fields. This Review provides a brief introduction to the methodology and interpretation of population and clinical epidemiology studies of musculoskeletal disorders. Data sources (including 'big data' and the issue of missing data), study design (cross-sectional, case-control and cohort studies, including clinical trial design) and the interpretation of study results are discussed with examples from the field of rheumatology, particularly using findings in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Two or more treatments can be compared in clinical trials using a variety of study designs including superiority, noninferiority or equivalence. The different types of risk in epidemiological studies-absolute, attributable, background and relative-are important concepts in epidemiological research and their relative usefulness to clinicians and patients should be considered carefully. The potential pitfalls and challenges of generalizing the results of epidemiological studies to understanding disease aetiology and to clinical practice are also emphasized. The aim of the Review is to help readers to critically appraise published articles that use epidemiological designs or methods.

Indexed as

Epidemiologic Research DesignHumansRheumatic Diseases

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.