Suppr超能文献

评估实验设计和观察性设计有效性的威胁因素。

Assessing threats to the validity of experimental and observational designs.

作者信息

Rogers J C, Holloway R L

机构信息

Department of Family Medicine, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School.

出版信息

Fam Pract Res J. 1990 Winter;10(2):81-95.

PMID:2288239
Abstract

Experimental designs, particularly the randomized trial, are viewed as the most scientifically rigorous methods by which knowledge is attained. Most clinical disciplines, however, use observational study designs more frequently than experimental designs. Nevertheless, the scientific rigor of experimental designs can be approximated by observational designs if common internal validity threats are recognized and addressed during the development of the research protocol. This paper presents a model of threats that can be applied to both types of designs to compare their scientific merits.

摘要

实验设计,尤其是随机试验,被视为获取知识的最科学严谨的方法。然而,大多数临床学科使用观察性研究设计的频率高于实验性设计。尽管如此,如果在研究方案制定过程中识别并解决常见的内部效度威胁,观察性设计可以近似实验设计的科学严谨性。本文提出了一个可应用于这两种设计类型以比较其科学优点的威胁模型。

相似文献

2
Methods in epidemiology: observational study designs.流行病学方法:观察性研究设计。
Pharmacotherapy. 2010 Oct;30(10):973-84. doi: 10.1592/phco.30.10.973.
3
Study designs in clinical research.临床研究中的研究设计。
Nephron Clin Pract. 2009;113(3):c218-21. doi: 10.1159/000235610. Epub 2009 Aug 18.
4
6
Bias in research.研究中的偏倚
Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2008 May;37(5):242-8.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验