Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Journal of Epidemiology
Published in: European Journal of Epidemiology 7/2007

Open Access 01-07-2007 | Commentary

Confounding in publications of observational intervention studies

Authors: Rolf H. H. Groenwold, Arno W. Hoes, Eelko Hak

Published in: European Journal of Epidemiology | Issue 7/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

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.
Literature
1.
Grobbee DE, Hoes AW Confounding and indication for treatment in evaluation of drug treatment for hypertension. BMJ 1997;315:1151–4PubMed
2.
Hak E, Verheij ThJM, Grobbee DE, Nichol KL, Hoes AW Confounding by indication in non-experimental evaluation of vaccine effectiveness: the example of prevention of influenza complications. J Epidemiol Community Health 2002;56:951–5PubMedCrossRef
3.
Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S Data dredging, bias, and confounding. BMJ 2002;325:1437–8CrossRef
4.
Hak E, Hoes AW, Nordin J, et al. Benefits of influenza vaccine in US elderly–appreciating issues of confounding bias and precision. Int J Epidemiol 2006;35:800–2PubMedCrossRef
5.
Psaty BM, Koepsell TD, Lin D, et al. Assessment of control of confounding by indication in observational studies. J Am Geriatr Soc 1999;47:749–754PubMed
6.
Deeks JJ, Dinnes J, D’Amico R, et al. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. Health Technol Assess 2003;7(27):1–173
7.
Davey Smith G, Ebrahim S Epidemiology–is it time to call it a day? Int J Epidemiol 2001;30:1–11PubMedCrossRef
8.
Schneeweiss S Sensitivity analysis and external adjustment for unmeasured confounders in epidemiologic database studies of therapeutics. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2006;15:291–303PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Confounding in publications of observational intervention studies
Authors
Rolf H. H. Groenwold
Arno W. Hoes
Eelko Hak
Publication date
01-07-2007
Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Published in
European Journal of Epidemiology / Issue 7/2007
Print ISSN: 0393-2990
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7284
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10654-007-9126-1

Other articles of this Issue 7/2007

European Journal of Epidemiology 7/2007 Go to the issue

Review Paper

Classification of sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease based on clinical and neuropathological characteristics

Cardiovascular Diseases

Comparison of relative and attributable risk of myocardial infarction and stroke according to C-reactive protein and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels

Cardiovascular disease

Ten-year change in serum uric acid and its relation to changes in other metabolic risk factors in young black and white adults: the CARDIA study

Gastro-intestinal disease

Psychosocial factors at work and in every day life are associated with irritable bowel syndrome

Letter to the Editor

Representativeness, losses to follow-up and validity in cohort studies

Original Paper

Using the European guidelines to evaluate the Norwegian Breast Cancer Screening Program