Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
5
pubmed:dateCreated
2011-4-15
pubmed:abstractText
The current emphasis on comparative effectiveness research will provide practicing physicians with increasing volumes of observational evidence about preventive care. However, numerous highly publicized observational studies of the effect of prevention on health outcomes have reported exaggerated relationships that were later contradicted by randomized controlled trials. A growing body of research has identified sources of bias in observational studies that are related to patient behaviors or underlying patient characteristics, known as the healthy user effect, the healthy adherer effect, confounding by functional status or cognitive impairment, and confounding by selective prescribing. In this manuscript we briefly review observational studies of prevention that have appeared to reach incorrect conclusions. We then describe potential sources of bias in these studies and discuss study designs, analytical methods, and sensitivity analyses that may mitigate bias or increase confidence in the results reported. More careful consideration of these sources of bias and study designs by providers can enhance evidence-based decision-making.
pubmed:grant
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
May
pubmed:issn
1525-1497
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Electronic
pubmed:volume
26
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
546-50
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed:year
2011
pubmed:articleTitle
Healthy user and related biases in observational studies of preventive interventions: a primer for physicians.
pubmed:affiliation
Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02120, USA. wshrank@partners.org
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Review, Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural