Cohort Studies: Prospective versus Retrospective
Author(s) -
Anne M. Euser,
Carmine Zoccali,
Kitty J. Jager,
Friedo W. Dekker
Publication year - 2009
Publication title -
nephron clinical practice
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1660-2110
DOI - 10.1159/000235241
Subject(s) - confounding , medicine , retrospective cohort study , selection bias , prospective cohort study , cohort , cohort study , clinical study design , clinical trial , pathology
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.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom