This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by SAUERLAND, S. Articles by NEUGEBAUER, E. A. M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by SAUERLAND, S. Articles by NEUGEBAUER, E. A. M. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Retrospective Clinical Studies in Surgery: Potentials and Pitfalls

From the Biochemical and Experimental Division, 2nd Department of Surgery, University of Cologne, Germany

Correspondence: Dr Stefan Sauerland, Biochemical and Experimental Section, 2nd Department of Surgery, University of Cologne, Ostmerheimer Strasse 200, D-51109 Köln, Germany. E-mail: s.sauerland{at}uni-koeln.de

As many surgical studies are performed retrospectively, it is desirable to improve the conduct, analysis and reporting of such research designs. This article reviews some of the most common forms of bias encountered in clinical research and outlines various types of study design and analysis that can help to minimize the amount of bias introduced into the results. We describe the advantages and disadvantages of ‘raw’ data analysis, stratified analysis, matched pair analysis and multivariate analysis, and apply them to an example of a hypothetical hand surgery study.

Journal of Hand Surgery (British and European Volume), Vol. 27, No. 2, 117-121 (2002)
DOI: 10.1054/JHSB.2001.0703


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?