Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32424412›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2020

Confounding and effect measure modification in reproductive medicine research.

Katharine Fb Correia, Laura E Dodge, Leslie V Farland, Michele R Hacker, Elizabeth Ginsburg, Brian W Whitcomb, Lauren A Wise, Stacey A Missmer

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06970886 (Effects of Rhythm-Based Music on Anxiety, Glucose, and Cortisol in Pregnancies With Gestational Diabetes), which is not on this map. Cited by 26 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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.

NCT06970886 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

Effects of Rhythm-Based Music on Anxiety, Glucose, and Cortisol in Pregnancies With Gestational Diabetes

TypeinterventionalSponsorEsin Ceber Turfan, ProfessorRan2025 to 2027Enrolled180ConditionsGestational Diabetes Mellitus in Pregnancy, Anxiety, Blood Sugar, HighArmsRhythm-Based Music Intervention
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors.

Katharine Fb CorreiaDepartment of Mathematics & Statistics, Amherst College, Amherst, MA, USA.
Laura E DodgeDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Leslie V FarlandDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Mel and Enid Zuckerman College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, USA.
Michele R HackerDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Elizabeth GinsburgDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Brian W WhitcombDepartment of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Public Health and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, USA.
Lauren A WiseDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.
Stacey A MissmerDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

NICHD NIH HHS L50 HD085412
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The majority of research within reproductive and gynecologic health, or investigating ART, is observational in design. One of the most critical challenges for observational studies is confounding, while one of the most important for discovery and inference is effect modification. In this commentary, we explain what confounding and effect modification are and why they matter. We present examples illustrating how failing to adjust for a confounder leads to invalid conclusions, as well as examples where adjusting for a factor that is not a confounder also leads to invalid or imprecise conclusions. Careful consideration of which factors may act as confounders or modifiers of the association of interest is critical to conducting sound research, particularly with complex observational studies in reproductive medicine.

Indexed as

Reproductive MedicineConfounding Factors, EpidemiologicFemaleHumansResearch Design

Identifiers

PMID32424412
PMCPMC8453425

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.