Use of an international data bank to compare outcome following severe head injury in different centres
- 1 March 1986
- journal article
- clinical trial
- Published by Wiley in Statistics in Medicine
- Vol. 5 (2), 103-112
- https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.4780050202
Abstract
The advantages and drawbacks of basing treatment comparisons on observational data are discussed. Recommendations are made for minimizing bias when basing comparisons on computerized data banks. A specific example is given concerning treatment following severe head injury.This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Studies without Internal ControlsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1984
- Designs for Experiments — Parallel Comparisons of TreatmentNew England Journal of Medicine, 1983
- A COMPARISON OF INTENSIVE CARE IN THE U.S.A. AND FRANCEThe Lancet, 1982
- The Competing Objectives of Randomized TrialsNew England Journal of Medicine, 1980
- Treatment for severe head injury.Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 1980
- Prognosis of Patients with Severe Head InjuryNeurosurgery, 1979
- Is Statistics a Science?Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, 1978
- PREDICTING OUTCOME IN INDIVIDUAL PATIENTS AFTER SEVERE HEAD INJURYThe Lancet, 1976
- ASSESSMENT OF OUTCOME AFTER SEVERE BRAIN DAMAGE A Practical ScaleThe Lancet, 1975
- ASSESSMENT OF COMA AND IMPAIRED CONSCIOUSNESSThe Lancet, 1974