The importance of matching language to type of evidence: avoiding the pitfalls of reporting outcomes data
- PMID: 23192955
- PMCID: PMC6652614
- DOI: 10.1002/clc.22066
The importance of matching language to type of evidence: avoiding the pitfalls of reporting outcomes data
Abstract
Results from different types of clinical research studies provide different types of evidence for evaluating the effects of a new drug or intervention. For this reason, it is important to recognize this phenomenon during reporting and to choose appropriate language to match the type of study that was done, because this can become critical to the interpretation and application of the results in clinical practice. In this article, we aim to highlight this issue through a series of examples and provide some guidance on what the appropriate language for different types of studies should be.
© 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
References
-
- Stampfer MJ, Willett WC, Colditz GA, et al. A prospective study of postmenopausal estrogen therapy and coronary heart disease. N Engl J Med. 1985;313:1044–1049. - PubMed
-
- Grodstein F, Stampfer MJ, Manson JE, et al. Postmenopausal estrogen and progestin use and the risk of cardiovascular disease. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:453–461. - PubMed
-
- Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice RL, et al. Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women's Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002;288:321–333. - PubMed
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
