ArticleHospital pediatrics2025
Performing a Multicenter Retrospective Study.
Article in Hospital pediatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Burden and Risk Factors for Severe Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection among Pediatric Hematopoietic Cell Transplant Recipients.Journal of the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society · 2026Article
- Feasibility of an Unfunded Multicenter Trial Group for Older Adult Burn Patients: A Retrospective Study.Journal of burn care & research : official publication of the American Burn Association · 2026Observational
- Lynch syndrome integrative epidemiology and genetics (LINEAGE): rationale for cohort design.Familial cancer · 2026Article
- lncRNA-based prognostic model for pancreatic cancer centered on the TME with exploratory LLPS connections.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Video-Based Skill Assessment for Postoperative T-Tube Nursing is Associated with Improved Clinical Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction: A Single-Center Retrospective Comparative Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Article
- Comparative effectiveness of adjunctive rifampicin versus gentamicin for prosthetic valve endocarditis due toJAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2025Article
- Real-World Multicenter Evaluation of MEMOTIN® for Tinnitus in Private Clinic Settings: The M.E.S.T Study.Cureus · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Multicenter retrospective studies can provide a pragmatic approach to evaluating uncommon pediatric conditions and are less expensive than prospective research. A well-executed retrospective multicenter study, with rigorous study design, systematic data collection, and robust statistical analysis, can produce clinically important and generalizable findings A variety of observational designs can be employed, including cross-sectional, cohort, and case-control studies. Selection bias, ascertainment bias, and confounding are common issues in retrospective research. Key steps include development of a feasible study design, regular contact with site investigators, and detailed data collection and management strategies. Principal investigators must seek to ensure that case ascertainment and data collection are consistent across sites, using manual and/or automated data extraction methods. Operations manuals, training sessions, and regular meetings can be used to ensure data reliability. Ethical considerations include obtaining institutional review board approval and establishing data use agreements. A proactive statistical approach to handling missing data, using techniques like multiple imputation and sensitivity analyses, is necessary. Careful planning, effective collaboration, and embracing technological advancements will enhance the value and accuracy of retrospective multicenter studies. This article discusses important considerations in the performance of a retrospective multicenter study.
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.