Postgrad Med J

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Zaccai, J H
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Zaccai, J H
Postgraduate Medical Journal 2004;80:140-147
© 2004 Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine


REVIEW

How to assess epidemiological studies

J H Zaccai

Correspondence to:
Correspondence to:
Ms Julia H Zaccai
Institute of Public Health, University of Cambridge, Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 2SR, UK; jhz21{at}cam.ac.uk

Assessing the quality of an epidemiological study equates to assessing whether the inferences drawn from it are warranted when account is taken of the methods, the representativeness of the study sample, and the nature of the population from which it is drawn. Bias, confounding, and chance can threaten the quality of an epidemiological study at all its phases. Nevertheless, their presence does not necessarily imply that a study should be disregarded. The reader must first balance any of these threats or missing information with their potential impact on the conclusions of the report.


Keywords: epidemiological studies




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Am J EpidemiolHome page
L. Tooth, R. Ware, C. Bain, D. M. Purdie, and A. Dobson
Quality of Reporting of Observational Longitudinal Research
Am. J. Epidemiol., February 1, 2005; 161(3): 280 - 288.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2004 The Fellowship of Postgraduate Medicine