Cohort studies: Prospective versus retrospective

254Citations
Citations of this article
1.1kReaders
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Cohort studies form a suitable study design to assess associations between multiple exposures on the one hand and multiple outcomes on the other hand. They are especially appropriate to study rare exposures or exposures for which randomization is not possible for practical or ethical reasons. Prospective and retrospective cohort studies have higher accuracy and higher efficiency as their respective main advantages. In addition to possible confounding by indication, cohort studies may suffer from selection bias. Confounding and bias should be prevented whenever possible, but still can exert unknown effects in unknown directions. If one is aware of this, cohort studies can form a potent study design in nephrology producing, in general, highly generalizable results. © 2009 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Euser, A. M., Zoccali, C., Jager, K. J., & Dekker, F. W. (2009, October). Cohort studies: Prospective versus retrospective. Nephron - Clinical Practice. https://doi.org/10.1159/000235241

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free