Journal
CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 11, Issue -, Pages 35-42Publisher
DOVE MEDICAL PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S178723
Keywords
epidemiology; therapeutics; diabetes mellitus; public health; effectiveness
Categories
Funding
- Novo Nordisk A/S
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Observational studies which evaluate effectiveness are often viewed with skepticism owing to the fact that patients are not randomized to treatment, meaning that results are more prone to bias. Therefore, randomized controlled trials remain the gold standard for evaluating treatment effectiveness. However, it is not always possible to conduct randomized trials. This may be due to financial constraints, for example, in identifying funding for a randomized trial for medicines that have already gained market authorization. There can also be challenges with recruitment, for example, of people with rare conditions or in hard-to-reach population subgroups. This is why observational studies are still needed. In this manuscript, we discuss how researchers can mitigate the risk of bias in the most common type of observational study design for evaluation of treatment effectiveness, the cohort study. We outline some key issues that warrant careful consideration at the outset when the question is being developed and the cohort study is being designed. We focus our discussion on the importance of deciding when to start follow-up in a study, choosing a comparator, managing confounding and measuring outcomes. We also illustrate the application of these considerations in a more detailed case study based on an examination of comparative effectiveness of two antidiabetic treatments using data collected during routine clinical practice.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available