The New England Journal of Medicine
e-mail icon  FREE NEJM E-TOC    HOME   |   SUBSCRIBE   |   CURRENT ISSUE   |   PAST ISSUES   |   COLLECTIONS   |    Advanced Search
Sign in | Get NEJM's E-Mail Table of Contents — Free | Subscribe
 
Correspondence
PreviousPrevious
Volume 343:1194-1197 October 19, 2000 Number 16
NextNext

Observational Studies and Randomized Trials

Since this article has no abstract, we have provided an extract of the first 100 words of the full text and any section headings.

 Sign up for free e-toc
 

This Article
-Full Text
-Purchase this article

Tools and Services
-Add to Personal Archive
-Add to Citation Manager
-Notify a Friend
-E-mail When Cited

More Information
-Related Article
 by Pocock, S. J.
-Related Article
 by Fisher, R. I.
-Related Article
 by Gottlieb, S. S.
-Related Article
 by Concato, J.
-PubMed Citation
To the Editor: In the June 22 issue, Concato et al.1 compared 5 systematic reviews of randomized, controlled trials and observational studies on the same topic, and Benson and Hartz2 evaluated 18 case studies of randomized, controlled trials and observational studies of different interventions and 3 reviews of randomized, controlled trials and observational studies of the same intervention. Do these data constitute a representative sample of all available comparisons in the medical literature? We think not. We know of at least two systematic reviews3,4 in which observational studies detected effects that were not supported by randomized, controlled trials. It would . . . [Full Text of this Article]

References


This article has been cited by other articles:



HOME  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SEARCH  |  CURRENT ISSUE  |  PAST ISSUES  |  COLLECTIONS  |  PRIVACY  |  TERMS OF USE  |  HELP  |  beta.nejm.org

Comments and questions? Please contact us.

The New England Journal of Medicine is owned, published, and copyrighted © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved.