Journal article icon

Journal article

In search of justification for the unpredictability paradox

Abstract:

A 2011 Cochrane Review found that adequately randomized trials sometimes revealed larger, sometimes smaller, and often similar effect sizes to inadequately randomized trials. However, they found no average statistically significant difference in effect sizes between the two study types. Yet instead of concluding that adequate randomization had no effect the review authors postulated the “unpredictability paradox”, which states that randomized and non-randomized studies differ, but in an unpre...

Expand abstract
Publication status:
Published
Peer review status:
Peer reviewed
Version:
Publisher's Version

Actions


Access Document


Files:
Publisher copy:
10.1186/1745-6215-15-480

Authors


More by this author
Department:
Oxford, SSD, Said Business School
Role:
Author
More by this author
Department:
Oxford,MSD,Primary Care Health Sciences
Role:
Author
Publisher:
BMC Publisher's website
Journal:
Trials Journal website
Volume:
15
Issue:
1
Pages:
480
Publication date:
2014-01-01
DOI:
EISSN:
1745-6215
Pubs id:
pubs:493496
URN:
uri:575aa1ab-090a-487b-94af-2b339cae7dd5
UUID:
uuid:575aa1ab-090a-487b-94af-2b339cae7dd5
Local pid:
pubs:493496
Paper number:
ARTN 480
Language:
English
Keywords:

Terms of use


Metrics


Views and Downloads






If you are the owner of this record, you can report an update to it here: Report update to this record

TO TOP