+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: Simple question re retrospective study types

  1. #1
    Points: 20, Level: 1
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 30

    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Simple question re retrospective study types




    Hi,

    Please could someone confirm that I'm using the correct terminology to describe two studies listed below. I think that they are both retrospective cohort studies. No randomisation occurred for either.

    (1) Using historical clinical records, the outcome for individuals which had the disease and received treatment A is compared to the outcome for individuals which had the disease and received no treatment

    (2) The outcome for individuals with the disease receiving treatment A now is compared using historical clinical records to the outcome for individuals which had the disease and received treatment B.


    Thank you.

  2. #2
    Omega Contributor
    Points: 39,062, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    hlsmith's Avatar
    Location
    Not Ames, IA
    Posts
    7,071
    Thanks
    402
    Thanked 1,192 Times in 1,153 Posts

    Re: Simple question re retrospective study types

    Do you have a list of possible answers to select from or not?


    I might be fine with that for a description of #1, but it comes down to how they collected data and the study design. If you use historic data and used exposure status to analyze outcomes , sure. But if you have outcomes then found exposure status you move towards case-control. It is hard to come up with an accurate description based on single sentences.
    Stop cowardice, ban guns!

  3. #3
    Points: 20, Level: 1
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 30

    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Re: Simple question re retrospective study types


    Quote Originally Posted by hlsmith View Post
    Do you have a list of possible answers to select from or not?


    I might be fine with that for a description of #1, but it comes down to how they collected data and the study design. If you use historic data and used exposure status to analyze outcomes , sure. But if you have outcomes then found exposure status you move towards case-control. It is hard to come up with an accurate description based on single sentences.
    Thank you. I'm asking this question because I've been asked to appraise the literature on condition for a medical conference - and want to avoid terminology that's incorrect :-).

    In the case of the second study, information I have is limited. The authors reported comparing individuals treated one way (their novel treatment) with similar individuals from older records, which had been treated a different way.

+ Reply to Thread

           




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts






Advertise on Talk Stats