Confounding in publications of observational intervention studies

被引：21

作者：

Groenwold, Rolf H. H.

Hoes, Arno W.

Hak, Eelko

机构：

[1] Univ Med Ctr, Juilius Ctr Hlth Sci & Primary Care, NL-3584 GC Utrecht, Netherlands

[2] Care Univ, Med Ctr, Julius Ctr Hlth Sci & Primary Sci, Utrecht, Netherlands

来源：

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY | 2007年 / 22卷 / 07期

关键词：

bias; confounding factors; epidemiology; methodology; VACCINE; BIAS;

D O I：

10.1007/s10654-007-9126-1

中图分类号：

R1 [预防医学、卫生学];

学科分类号：

1004 ; 120402 ;

摘要：

We conducted a systematic literature search in Medline to assess the proportion of observational intervention studies appreciating confounding bias in peer-reviewed medical literature from 1985 through 2005. This study shows only 9% of all papers on observational intervention studies published in peer-reviewed medical journals mention any of the terms (confounding, adjustment, or bias) indicating appreciation of confounding.

引用

页码：413 / 415

页数：3

共 8 条

[1]

Deeks J J, 2003, Health Technol Assess, V7, piii

[2]

Grobbee DE, 1997, BRIT MED J, V315, P1151

[3] Benefits of influenza vaccine in US elderly - appreciating issues of confounding bias and precision [J].