2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2004.12.1118
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bias in observational study of the effectiveness of nasal corticosteroids in asthma

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
22
0
1

Year Published

2006
2006
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
0
22
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…8 Developing allergic rhinitis in infancy is considered as a significant risk factor for developing asthma at a later age. 9 Both allergic rhinitis and asthma have common underling factors. Education programs when designed should have this in mind and should emphasis on combined treatment for both.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…8 Developing allergic rhinitis in infancy is considered as a significant risk factor for developing asthma at a later age. 9 Both allergic rhinitis and asthma have common underling factors. Education programs when designed should have this in mind and should emphasis on combined treatment for both.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…15,16 By contrast, a third observational study found no benefit of intranasal corticosteroids in preventing asthma-related hospitalisations. 30 Confounding by indication may be one possible explanation for this finding, whereby the true effect of intranasal corticosteroids is underestimated because treatments are not randomly assigned and it is the patients with more severe asthma who are prescribed intranasal corticosteroids. This difference was evident (although not statistically tested) in asthma-related parameters between the unmatched cohorts at baseline in the present study.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…30,31 Moreover, the study of outcomes over a full year after the index prescription minimised the influence of seasonal variations in symptoms. While we attempted to address all confounding factors, a limitation of this study, as with all observational studies, is the possibility of unrecognised confounding factors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Time-related biases, such as immortal time bias, time window bias, and time lag bias, have been previously described in studies of diabetes treatment (10) and in other therapeutic areas (11)(12)(13)(14). These biases result from not properly classifying exposure during the followup of a cohort study or from measuring exposure over unequal time intervals in case-control studies, which can produce spurious risk reductions.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%