...
首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Epidemiology >Bias in clinical intervention research.
【24h】

Bias in clinical intervention research.

机译:临床干预研究中的偏见。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Research on bias in clinical trials may help identify some of the reasons why investigators sometimes reach the wrong conclusions about intervention effects. Several quality components for the assessment of bias control have been suggested, but although they seem intrinsically valid, empirical evidence is needed to evaluate their effects on the extent and direction of bias. This narrative review summarizes the findings of methodological studies on the influence of bias in clinical trials. A number of methodological studies suggest that lack of adequate randomization in published trial reports may be associated with more positive estimates of intervention effects. The influence of double-blinding and follow-up is less clear. Several studies have found a significant association between funding sources and pro-industry conclusions. However, the methodological studies also show that bias is difficult to detect and appraise. The extent of bias in individual trials is unpredictable. A-priori exclusion of trials with certain characteristics is not recommended. Appraising bias control in individual trials is necessary to avoid making incorrect conclusions about intervention effects.
机译:对临床试验偏倚的研究可能有助于确定研究者有时得出有关干预效果的错误结论的一些原因。已经提出了几种用于评估偏差控制的质量要素,但是尽管它们本质上是有效的,但仍需要经验证据来评估其对偏差程度和方向的影响。这篇叙述性综述总结了方法学研究对临床试验中偏倚影响的研究结果。许多方法学研究表明,已发表的试验报告中缺乏足够的随机性可能与干预效果的更积极估计有关。双盲和随访的影响尚不清楚。多项研究发现,资金来源与行业前结论之间存在显着关联。但是,方法学研究还表明,偏倚很难检测和评估。个别试验的偏倚程度是无法预测的。不建议先排除具有某些特征的试验。为了避免对干预效果做出错误的结论,有必要在个别试验中评估偏倚控制。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号