Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials - Odgaard‐Jensen, J - 2011 | Cochrane Library https://t.co/tfSRZh1g2O
RT @sean9n: "Observational evidence is clearly better than opinion, but it is thoroughly unsatisfactory. The only exceptions are drugs whos…
"Observational evidence is clearly better than opinion, but it is thoroughly unsatisfactory. The only exceptions are drugs whose effects on immediate mortality were so obvious that no RCTS were necessary, such as insulin, sulphonamide, and penicillin" htt
割付けの隠蔽化が不明瞭なRCTは効果を40%ほど過大評価しやすい。一方、隠蔽化が適正に行われているものとそう変わらないという報告もある。 Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials - Odgaard‐Jensen, J - 2011 | Cochrane Library https://t.co/QDWrlK1v4v
「治療効果の偏った推定に対する予防策としてのランダム化比較試験」に関するコクランレビューの日本語要約が公開されました。ランダム化試験と非ランダム化試験の結果は、時には異なるという結果でした。 #CochraneDatabaseOfSystematicReviews #メタ疫学 https://t.co/ECYfz7D5oO
Some researchers compared the results of clinical trials that use randomisation versus those which didn't http://t.co/0iUtAZFgsd
Some researchers compared the results of clinical trials that use randomisation versus those which didn't http://t.co/0iUtAZFgsd