RE: "EFFECT ESTIMATES IN RANDOMIZED TRIALS AND OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES: COMPARING APPLES WITH APPLES".

Michael Schomaker, Felicitas Kühne, Uwe Siebert

Abstract readLetterComment

In one paragraph

Article in American journal of epidemiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

4citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

[Comparing the effectiveness of multiple dynamic treatment strategies using target trial emulation].Pravention und Gesundheitsforderung · 2023
Article
The Impact of Same-Day Antiretroviral Therapy Initiation Under the World Health Organization Treat-All Policy.American journal of epidemiology · 2021
Article
New Perspective for Soft Tissue Closure in Medication-Related Osteonecrosis of the Jaw (MRONJ) Using Barbed Sutures.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021
Article
Increased Mortality With Delayed and Missed Switch to Second-Line Antiretroviral Therapy in South Africa.Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes (1999) · 2020
Article

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

Comment on
Effect Estimates in Randomized Trials and Observational Studies: Comparing Apples With Apples.2019

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Michael SchomakerInstitute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research, and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria.

Felicitas KühneInstitute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research, and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria.

Uwe SiebertInstitute of Public Health, Medical Decision Making and Health Technology Assessment, Department of Public Health, Health Services Research, and Health Technology Assessment, UMIT-University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

MalusRandomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Identifiers

PMID31529036

DOI10.1093/aje/kwz194

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.