Choose your font:
 Arimo
 Merriweather
 Mukta Malar
 Open Sans Condensed
 Rokkitt
 Source Sans Pro
 Login


 English 
 Français 
 Português 
 Español 

[Valid RSS] RSS
bar

Database - (CIANE)

Description of this bibliographical database (CIANE website)
Currently 3111 records
YouTube channel (tutorial)

https://ciane.net/id=1013

Created on : 16 Nov 2004
Modified on : 01 Nov 2018

 Modify this record
Do not follow this link unless you know an editor’s password!


Share: Facebook logo   Tweeter logo   Easy

Bibliographical entry (without author) :

The scandal of poor epidemiological research. Editorial. The British Medical Journal 2004;329:868-869.

Author(s) :

von Elm, E., Egger, M.

Year of publication :

2004

URL(s) :

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/329/74…
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.329.7471.868

Résumé (français)  :

Abstract (English)  :

Something surely must be wrong with epidemiology when the new editors of a leading journal in the field entitle their inaugural offering, “Epidemiology—is it time to call it a day?“1 Observational epidemiology has not had a good press in recent years. Conflicting results from epidemiological studies of the risks of daily life, such as coffee, hair dye, or hormones, are frequently and eagerly reported in the popular press, providing a constant source of anxiety for the public. In many cases deeply held beliefs, given credibility by numerous observational studies over long periods of time, are challenged only when contradicted by randomised trials. In the most recent example, a Cochrane review of randomised trials shows that antioxidant vitamins do not prevent gastrointestinal cancer and may even increase all cause mortality.

Now Pocock et al describe the quality and the litany of problems of 73 epidemiological studies published in January 2001 in general medical and specialist journals (p 883).
(Ctd in full text)

Sumário (português)  :

Resumen (español)  :

Comments :

Argument (français) :

Les résultats des recherches épidémiologiques sont souvent faussés par une mauvaise méthodologie, aboutissant à trouver de fausses corrélations. Un guide mode d’emploi est proposé.

Argument (English):

The results of epidemiological research are often biased by poor methodology, leading to false correlations. A user guide is available.

Argumento (português):

Os resultados da pesquisa epidemiológica são frequentemente influenciados por uma metodologia pobre, levando a falsas correlações. Um guia do usuário está disponível.

Argumento (español):

Keywords :

➡ ethics ; evidence-based medicine/midwifery ; deontology ; informed consent

Author of this record :

Cécile Loup — 16 Nov 2004
➡ latest update : Bernard Bel — 01 Nov 2018

Discussion (display only in English)
 
➡ Only identified users



 I have read the guidelines of discussions and I accept all terms (read guidelines)

barre

New expert query --- New simple query

Creating new record --- Importing records

User management --- Dump database --- Contact

bar

This database created by Alliance francophone pour l'accouchement respecté (AFAR) is managed
by Collectif interassociatif autour de la naissance (CIANE, https://ciane.net).
It is fed by the voluntary contributions of persons interested in the sharing of scientific data.
If you agree with this project, you can support us in several ways:
(1) contributing to this database if you have a minimum training in documentation
(2) or financially supporting CIANE (see below)
(3) or joining any society affiliated with CIANE.
Sign in or create an account to follow changes or become an editor.
Contact bibli(arobase)ciane.net for more information.

Valid CSS! Valid HTML!
Donating to CIANE (click “Faire un don”) will help us to maintain and develop sites and public
databases towards the support of parents and caregivers’ informed decisions with respect to childbirth