Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32814836›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2020

Let the question determine the methods: descriptive epidemiology done right.

Sara Conroy, Eleanor J Murray

Abstract readComment
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 55 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
55citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

55 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Cardiac monitoring in adolescent and young adult cancer patients treated with anthracyclines: a longitudinal descriptive study.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Unmet needs among long-term breast cancer survivors.Cancer causes & control : CCC · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Sara ConroyCenter for Biostatistics, Department of Biomedical Informatics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. Sara.Conroy@osumc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9155-9456
Eleanor J MurrayDepartment of Epidemiology, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

What does it mean to control for confounding, and when do we actually need to do it? To answer this, we need a well-defined research question, driven by the goal of the study. For descriptive goals, we explain that confounding adjustment is often not just unnecessary but can be harmful.

Indexed as

BursitisNeoplasmsCohort StudiesHumansResearch

Identifiers

PMID32814836
PMCPMC7592039

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.