title: Are we making a mountain out of a mole hill? A call to appropriate interpretation of clinical trials and population-based studies.
abstract: The volume of scientific articles being published continues to grow. Simultaneously, the ease with which both patients and providers can access scholarly articles is also increasing. One potential benefit of easy accessibility is broader awareness of new evidence. However, with a large volume of literature, it is often difficult to thoroughly review each article. Therefore, busy clinicians and inquisitive patients may often read the conclusion as their take-away message. In this article, we provide an overview of a few challenging study designs that are at increased risk for over- or understating conclusions, potentially leading to changes in clinical practice.
authors.affiliation: Department of Maternal and Child Health Research Program, Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. suchitra.chandrasekaran@uphs.upenn.edu
authors.forename: Suchitra
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Chandrasekaran
authors.forename: Mary D
authors.initials: MD
authors.lastname: Sammel
authors.forename: Sindhu K
authors.initials: SK
authors.lastname: Srinivas
mesh_terms: D002986:Clinical Trials as Topic / Q000592:standards*; D015331:Cohort Studies; D057186:Comparative Effectiveness Research; D003627:Data Interpretation, Statistical; D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D009774:Obstetrics; D012107:Research Design