Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28546780›Full record

ReviewPragmatic and observational research2017

The value of pragmatic and observational studies in health care and public health.

Maxwell S Barnish, Steve Turner

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pragmatic and observational research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
–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

68 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. How Pragmatic Are Sarcopenia Intervention Studies? A Systematic Review.Journal of cachexia, sarcopenia and muscle · 2026
    Pooled it
  3. Telemedicine Implementation for Safety Net Populations: A Systematic Review.Telemedicine journal and e-health : the official journal of the American Telemedicine Association · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Strength of association between comorbidities and asthma: a meta-analysis.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2023
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. C-REGS2-A multinational, high-quality comparative effectiveness study of Cerebrolysin in moderate acute ischemic stroke.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article

8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors.

Maxwell S BarnishChild Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.
Steve TurnerChild Health, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence-based practice is an important component of health care service delivery. However, there is a tendency, embodied in tools such as Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation, to focus principally on the classification of study design, at the expense of a detailed assessment of the strengths and limitations of the individual study. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and in particular the classical "explanatory" RCT, have a privileged place in the hierarchy of evidence. However, classical RCTs have substantial limitations, most notably a lack of generalizability, which limit their direct applicability to clinical practice implementation. Pragmatic and observational studies can provide an invaluable perspective into real-world applicability. This evidence could be used more widely to complement ideal-condition results from classical RCTs, following the principle of triangulation. In this review article, we discuss several types of pragmatic and observational studies that could be used in this capacity. We discuss their particular strengths and how their limitations may be overcome and provide real-life examples by means of illustration.

Indexed as

disease registriesevidence-based medicineobservational studiespragmatic trialsrandomized controlled trialsresearch methods

Identifiers

PMID28546780
PMCPMC5438073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.