Content deleted Content added
→History: this claim has appeared elsewhere, no source for "earliest" |
m →Empirical evidence that randomization makes a difference: Journal cites, set missing volume/issue/pages parameter, added 1 issue number using AWB (12142) |
||
Line 125:
==Empirical evidence that randomization makes a difference==
Empirically differences between randomized and non-randomized studies,<ref>{{cite journal| doi=10.1002/14651858.MR000034.pub2|vauthors=Anglemyer A, Horvath HT, Bero L | title=Healthcare outcomes assessed with observational study designs compared with those assessed in randomized trials| journal=Cochrane Database Syst Rev|date=April 2014| pmid=24782322| volume=4| pages=MR000034}}</ref> and between adequately and inadequately randomized trials have been difficult to detect.<ref>{{cite journal| doi=10.1002/14651858.MR000012.pub3| vauthors=Odgaard-Jensen J, Vist G, etal |title=Randomisation to protect against selection bias in healthcare trials.| journal=Cochrane Database Syst Rev| date=April 2011|pmid=21491415|pages=MR000012| issue=4}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal| doi=10.1186/1745-6215-15-480|vauthors=Howick J, Mebius A |title=In search of justification for the unpredictability paradox| journal=Trials| year=2014| volume=15| pmid=25490908| pages=480}}</ref>
==See also==
| |||