Are Observational Studies More Informative Than Randomized Controlled Trials in Hypertension?Response to Are Observational Studies More Informative Than Randomized Controlled Trials in Hypertension? Con Side of the Argument

Giuseppe Schillaci; Francesca Battista; Giacomo Pucci

首页> 外文期刊>Hypertension: An Official Journal of the American Heart Association >Are Observational Studies More Informative Than Randomized Controlled Trials in Hypertension?Response to Are Observational Studies More Informative Than Randomized Controlled Trials in Hypertension? Con Side of the Argument

【24h】

Are Observational Studies More Informative Than Randomized Controlled Trials in Hypertension?Response to Are Observational Studies More Informative Than Randomized Controlled Trials in Hypertension? Con Side of the Argument

机译：观察性研究是否比高血压随机对照试验更有信息？对观察性研究是否比高血压随机对照试验更有意义？论点的缺点

获取原文

掌桥外文数据库（机构版） >>

开具论文收录证明 >>

页面导航

摘要
著录项
相似文献
相关主题

摘要

The very first rigorously designed, randomized controlled trial (RCT) in the history of modern medicine was published in 1948

机译：现代医学史上首个严格设计的随机对照试验（RCT）于1948年发表

著录项

来源
《Hypertension: An Official Journal of the American Heart Association》 |2013年第3期|共7页
作者
Giuseppe Schillaci; Francesca Battista; Giacomo Pucci;
展开▼
作者单位

展开▼
收录信息
原文格式 PDF
正文语种
中图分类心脏、血管（循环系）疾病;
关键词
入库时间 2022-08-18 20:10:59

相似文献

外文文献
中文文献
专利

1. Are Observational Studies More Informative Than Randomized Controlled Trials in Hypertension?Response to Are Observational Studies More Informative Than Randomized Controlled Trials in Hypertension? Pro Side of the Argument [J] . Giovanni de Simone, Raffaele Izzo, Paolo Verdecchia Hypertension: An Official Journal of the American Heart Association . 2013,第3期

机译：观察性研究是否比高血压随机对照试验更有信息？对观察性研究是否比高血压随机对照试验更有意义？赞成的一方
2. Are observational studies more informative than randomized controlled trials in hypertension?: Con side of the argument [J] . SchillaciG., BattistaF., PucciG. Hypertension: An Official Journal of the American Heart Association . 2013,第3期

机译：在高血压方面，观察性研究是否比随机对照试验提供更多信息？
3. Are observational studies more informative than randomized controlled trials in hypertension?: Pro side of the argument [J] . DeSimoneG., IzzoR., VerdecchiaP. Hypertension: An Official Journal of the American Heart Association . 2013,第3期

机译：在高血压方面，观察性研究是否比随机对照试验更有价值？
4. Adding Potassium and Calcium to the dietary salt as a hypertension-preventive approach in adolescents with higher blood pressure and their family members: a random single-blind controlled trial [C] . Jianjun Mu, Zhiquan Liu, Xianglin Xu, “中、美食盐与健康”国际研讨会（International Workshop of Dietary Sodium and Human Health in China and the United States） . 2008

机译：在高血压的青少年及其家庭成员中，作为预防高血压的方法，向饮食盐中添加钾和钙：一项随机的单盲对照试验
5. Examination of a Culturally Sensitive Dietary Education Intervention to Treat Hypertension for Chinese Canadians in the Community: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial. [D] . Zou, Ping. 2015

机译：对社区中华裔加拿大人进行高血压治疗的文化敏感性饮食教育干预措施的检验：一项随机对照试验。
6. Are Observational Studies More Informative Than Randomized Controlled Trials in Hypertension?: Pro Side of the Argument. [O] . de Simone G, Izzo R, Verdecchia P 2013

机译：更多的观察性研究是否比高血压的对照试验更具信息性？：论证的一面。

Are Observational Studies More Informative Than Randomized Controlled Trials in Hypertension?Response to Are Observational Studies More Informative Than Randomized Controlled Trials in Hypertension? Con Side of the Argument

摘要

著录项

相似文献

相关主题

期刊订阅