Use my Search Websuite to scan PubMed, PMCentral, Journal Hosts and Journal Archives, FullText. Kick-your-searchterm to multiple Engines kick-your-query now !>

A dictionary by aggregated review articles of nephrology, medicine and the life sciences Your one-stop-run pathway from word to the immediate pdf of peer-reviewed on-topic knowledge.

10.1111/sdi.12518 http://scihub22266oqcxt.onion/10.1111/sdi.12518 C5014621!5014621!27207819     free     free     free Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 211.6 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Deprecated: Implicit conversion from float 245.2 to int loses precision in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 534 Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\27207819.jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117       Semin+Dial 2016 ; 29 (5): 342-6 Nephropedia Template TP {{tp|p=27207819|t=2016. Balancing the Evidence: How to Reconcile the Results of Observational Studies vs Randomized Clinical Trials in Dialysis |pdf=|usr=}}{{27207819}} gab.com Text Balancing the Evidence: How to Reconcile the Results of Observational Studies vs Randomized Clinical Trials in Dialysis JO: Semin Dial http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=27207819 #FOAvip Because large randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in dialysis have been relatively scarce, evidence-based dialysis care has depended heavily on the results of observational studies. However, when results from RCTs appear to contradict the findings of observational studies, nephrologists are left to wonder which type of study they should believe. In this editorial we explore the key differences between observational studies and RCTs in the context of such seemingly conflicting studies in dialysis. Confounding is the major limitation of observational studies, while low statistical power and problems with external validity are more likely to limit the findings of RCTs. Differences in the specification of the population, exposure, and outcomes can also contribute to different results among RCTs and observational studies. Rigorous methods are required regardless of what type of study is conducted, and readers should not automatically assume that one type of study design is superior to the other. Ultimately, dialysis care requires both well-designed, well-conducted observational studies and RCTs to move the field forward. Twit Text FOAVip Balancing the Evidence: How to Reconcile the Results of Observational Studies vs Randomized Clinical Trials in Dialysis ????Semin Dial http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=27207819 #FOAvip Twit Text # Free Paper on # # # # # LINK http://www.kidney.de/pget.php?&tw=1&pmid=27207819 #FOAvip English Wikipedia <ref>{{Cite pmid|27207819}}</ref> Balancing the Evidence: How to Reconcile the Results of Observational Studies vs Randomized Clinical Trials in Dialysis #MMPMID27207819 Shen JI; Lum EL; Chang TI Semin Dial 2016[Sep]; 29 (5): 342-6 PMID27207819show ga Because large randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in dialysis have been relatively scarce, evidence-based dialysis care has depended heavily on the results of observational studies. However, when results from RCTs appear to contradict the findings of observational studies, nephrologists are left to wonder which type of study they should believe. In this editorial we explore the key differences between observational studies and RCTs in the context of such seemingly conflicting studies in dialysis. Confounding is the major limitation of observational studies, while low statistical power and problems with external validity are more likely to limit the findings of RCTs. Differences in the specification of the population, exposure, and outcomes can also contribute to different results among RCTs and observational studies. Rigorous methods are required regardless of what type of study is conducted, and readers should not automatically assume that one type of study design is superior to the other. Ultimately, dialysis care requires both well-designed, well-conducted observational studies and RCTs to move the field forward. äBalancing the Evidence: How to Reconcile the Results of Observational (epmc).pdf DeepDyve Pubget Overpricing