The unpredictability paradox: review of empirical comparisons of randomised and non-randomised clinical trials

AUTOR(ES)

Kunz, Regina

FONTE

British Medical Journal

RESUMO

Objective To summarise comparisons of randomised clinical trials and non-randomised clinical trials, trials with adequately concealed random allocation versus inadequately concealed random allocation, and high quality trials versus low quality trials where the effect of randomisation could not be separated from the effects of other methodological manoeuvres.

Documentos Relacionados

• Case‐mix adjustment in non‐randomised observational evaluations: the constant risk fallacy
• Does the school fruit and vegetable scheme improve children's diet? A non‐randomised controlled trial
• Making public health interventions more evidence based: TREND statement for non-randomised designs will make a difference
• Teletherapy for subfoveal choroidal neovascularisation of age-related macular degeneration: results of follow up in a non-randomised study.
• Effect of the critical care outreach team on patient survival to discharge from hospital and readmission to critical care: non-randomised population based study