Some Observations on “Observational” Research

Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 52 (2):252-263 (2009)
Evidence-based medicine (EBM) ranks different medical research methods on a hierarchy, at the top of which are randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews or meta-analyses of RCTs. Any study that does not randomly assign patients to a treatment or a control group is automatically placed at a lower level on the hierarchy. This article argues that what matters is whether the treatment and control groups are similar with respect to potential confounding factors, not whether they got that way through randomization. Moreover, nonrandomized studies tend to have other characteristics that make them useful sources of evidence, in that they tend to last longer and to enroll more patients than do randomized trials. Replacing the sharp dichotomy between randomized and nonrandomized studies with a continuum from "clean" studies (which have high internal validity but whose results do not readily generalize to clinical practice) to pragmatic studies (which are designed to more closely reflect clinical practice) would also make a place for outcomes research and research using clinical databases, which are not included in the current hierarchy of evidence but which can provide important information about the safety and efficacy of treatments.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1353/pbm.0.0076
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 24,463
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Jacob Stegenga (2016). Hollow Hunt for Harms. Perspectives on Science 24 (5):481-504.
Daniele Chiffi & Renzo Zanotti (2015). Perspectives on Clinical Possibility: Elements of Analysis. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice:DOI: 10.1111/jep.12447.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
A. la Caze (2009). Evidence-Based Medicine Must Be .. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 34 (5):509-527.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

31 ( #155,124 of 1,925,541 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

2 ( #308,489 of 1,925,541 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.