Freedman David A
University of California, Berkeley, USA.
Eval Rev. 2006 Dec;30(6):691-713. doi: 10.1177/0193841X06293771.
Experiments offer more reliable evidence on causation than observational studies, which is not to gainsay the contribution to knowledge from observation. Experiments should be analyzed as experiments, not as observational studies. A simple comparison of rates might be just the right tool, with little value added by "sophisticated" models. This article discusses current models for causation, as applied to experimental and observational data. The intention-to-treat principle and the effect of treatment on the treated will also be discussed. Flaws in per-protocol and treatment-received estimates will be demonstrated.
与观察性研究相比,实验能提供关于因果关系更可靠的证据,这并不是要否定观察对知识的贡献。实验应作为实验来分析,而不是作为观察性研究。简单的率比较可能就是合适的工具,“复杂”模型几乎没有增加价值。本文讨论了应用于实验和观察性数据的当前因果关系模型。还将讨论意向性分析原则以及治疗对接受治疗者的影响。将展示符合方案分析和接受治疗情况估计中的缺陷。