亲爱的研友该休息了!由于当前在线用户较少,发布求助请尽量完整地填写文献信息,科研通机器人24小时在线,伴您度过漫漫科研夜!身体可是革命的本钱,早点休息,好梦!

Comparison of Effects in Randomized Controlled Trials With Observational Studies in Digestive Surgery

作者
Satoru Shikata,Takeo Nakayama,Yoshinori Noguchi,Yoshinori Taji,Hisakazu Yamagishi
出处
期刊:Annals of Surgery [Lippincott Williams & Wilkins]
卷期号:244 (5): 668-676 被引量:93
标识
DOI:10.1097/01.sla.0000225356.04304.bc
摘要

In Brief Objectives: To compare the results of randomized controlled trials versus observational studies in meta-analyses of digestive surgical topics. Summary Background Data: While randomized controlled trials have been recognized as providing the highest standard of evidence, claims have been made that observational studies may overestimate treatment benefits. This debate has recently been renewed, particularly with regard to pharmacotherapies. Methods: The PubMed (1966 to April 2004), EMBASE (1986 to April 2004) and Cochrane databases (Issue 2, 2004) were searched to identify meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials in digestive surgery. Fifty-two outcomes of 18 topics were identified from 276 original articles (96 randomized trials, 180 observational studies) and included in meta-analyses. All available binary data and study characteristics were extracted and combined separately for randomized and observational studies. In each selected digestive surgical topic, summary odds ratios or relative risks from randomized controlled trials were compared with observational studies using an equivalent calculation method. Results: Significant between-study heterogeneity was seen more often among observational studies (5 of 12 topics) than among randomized trials (1 of 9 topics). In 4 of the 16 primary outcomes compared (10 of 52 total outcomes), summary estimates of treatment effects showed significant discrepancies between the two designs. Conclusions: One fourth of observational studies gave different results than randomized trials, and between-study heterogeneity was more common in observational studies in the field of digestive surgery. Comparison of the results of randomized controlled trials versus observational studies in meta-analyses of digestive surgical topics was performed. One fourth of observational studies gave different results than randomized trials, and between-study heterogeneity was more common in observational studies in the field of digestive surgery.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4秒前
YP发布了新的文献求助20
11秒前
KY2022完成签到,获得积分10
41秒前
52秒前
1分钟前
劳永杰发布了新的文献求助10
1分钟前
1分钟前
可爱初瑶发布了新的文献求助10
1分钟前
1分钟前
1分钟前
哭泣的金鱼完成签到,获得积分10
1分钟前
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2分钟前
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2分钟前
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2分钟前
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2分钟前
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
2分钟前
会飞的柯基完成签到 ,获得积分10
2分钟前
充电宝应助Marciu33采纳,获得10
2分钟前
bkagyin应助江锦雯采纳,获得10
3分钟前
3分钟前
阿叶完成签到,获得积分10
3分钟前
江锦雯发布了新的文献求助10
3分钟前
江锦雯完成签到,获得积分20
3分钟前
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4分钟前
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4分钟前
慕青应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4分钟前
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4分钟前
Kao应助科研通管家采纳,获得10
4分钟前
9527举报求助违规成功
4分钟前
Singularity举报求助违规成功
4分钟前
Criminology34举报求助违规成功
4分钟前
4分钟前
9527举报求助违规成功
4分钟前
Criminology34举报求助违规成功
4分钟前
MchemG举报求助违规成功
4分钟前
4分钟前
4分钟前
9527举报求助违规成功
4分钟前
高分求助中
Principles of Economics, 11th Edition 10000
University Physics with Modern Physics, 16th edition 10000
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
Development of a Bridge Weigh-In-Motion System: A technology to convert the bridge response to the passage of traffic into data on vehicle configurations, speeds, times of travel and weights 1000
ズームレンズの光学設計に関する研究 800
Fundamentals of Pharmaceutical and Biologics Regulations: A Global Perspective, Second Edition 700
Matrix Methods in Data Mining and Pattern Recognition Second Edition 610
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 内科学 物理 复合材料 催化作用 细胞生物学 无机化学 光电子学 物理化学 电极 基因
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 7281803
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8902669
关于积分的说明 18833445
捐赠科研通 6953095
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 3207531
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 2377801
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 2182693