Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Comparison of acute and chronic airway diseases...

Research

Associated organisational unit

View graph of relations

Comparison of acute and chronic airway diseases in the Cochrane Library: implications for clinicians and researchers

Research output: Contribution to conference - Without ISBN/ISSN › Poster › peer-review

Published

Standard

Comparison of acute and chronic airway diseases in the Cochrane Library: implications for clinicians and researchers. / Rowe, Brian; Milan, Stephen James; Cates, Christopher et al.
2004.

Research output: Contribution to conference - Without ISBN/ISSN › Poster › peer-review

Harvard

Rowe, B, Milan, SJ, Cates, C & Lasserson, T 2004, 'Comparison of acute and chronic airway diseases in the Cochrane Library: implications for clinicians and researchers'.

APA

Rowe, B., Milan, S. J., Cates, C., & Lasserson, T. (2004). Comparison of acute and chronic airway diseases in the Cochrane Library: implications for clinicians and researchers.

Vancouver

Rowe B, Milan SJ, Cates C, Lasserson T. Comparison of acute and chronic airway diseases in the Cochrane Library: implications for clinicians and researchers. 2004.

Author

Rowe, Brian ; Milan, Stephen James ; Cates, Christopher et al. / Comparison of acute and chronic airway diseases in the Cochrane Library: implications for clinicians and researchers.

Bibtex

@conference{04a502f17cb349bf83809fab0d7c521b,
title = "Comparison of acute and chronic airway diseases in the Cochrane Library: implications for clinicians and researchers",
abstract = "Objectives: To compare the number and size of clinical trials included in chronic asthma/COPD reviews with acute asthma/COPD reviews published in the Cochrane Library.Methods: Accessed the Cochrane reviews on line. Statistics: simple descriptive and comparisons.Results: A total of 29 acute and 91 chronic SRs were identified. The average number of participants per review in acute reviews was 574 compared with 2072 in chronic reviews (p = 0.02). The average number of included studies in acute respiratory reviews was 10 compared with 14.2 in chronic respiratory reviews (p = 0.07).Conclusions: Although there was a non-significant difference in the number of studies included in acute and chronic respiratory reviews, studies included in chronic respiratory Cochrane reviews were larger. Small trials are associated with providing less accurate effect estimates, and may be prone to chance findings. More research using larger samples is required to answer important clinical questions for clinicians, consumers and policy makers in the treatment of acute respiratory diseases.",
author = "Brian Rowe and Milan, {Stephen James} and Christopher Cates and Toby Lasserson",
year = "2004",
language = "English",

}

RIS

TY - CONF

T1 - Comparison of acute and chronic airway diseases in the Cochrane Library: implications for clinicians and researchers

AU - Rowe, Brian

AU - Milan, Stephen James

AU - Cates, Christopher

AU - Lasserson, Toby

PY - 2004

Y1 - 2004

N2 - Objectives: To compare the number and size of clinical trials included in chronic asthma/COPD reviews with acute asthma/COPD reviews published in the Cochrane Library.Methods: Accessed the Cochrane reviews on line. Statistics: simple descriptive and comparisons.Results: A total of 29 acute and 91 chronic SRs were identified. The average number of participants per review in acute reviews was 574 compared with 2072 in chronic reviews (p = 0.02). The average number of included studies in acute respiratory reviews was 10 compared with 14.2 in chronic respiratory reviews (p = 0.07).Conclusions: Although there was a non-significant difference in the number of studies included in acute and chronic respiratory reviews, studies included in chronic respiratory Cochrane reviews were larger. Small trials are associated with providing less accurate effect estimates, and may be prone to chance findings. More research using larger samples is required to answer important clinical questions for clinicians, consumers and policy makers in the treatment of acute respiratory diseases.

AB - Objectives: To compare the number and size of clinical trials included in chronic asthma/COPD reviews with acute asthma/COPD reviews published in the Cochrane Library.Methods: Accessed the Cochrane reviews on line. Statistics: simple descriptive and comparisons.Results: A total of 29 acute and 91 chronic SRs were identified. The average number of participants per review in acute reviews was 574 compared with 2072 in chronic reviews (p = 0.02). The average number of included studies in acute respiratory reviews was 10 compared with 14.2 in chronic respiratory reviews (p = 0.07).Conclusions: Although there was a non-significant difference in the number of studies included in acute and chronic respiratory reviews, studies included in chronic respiratory Cochrane reviews were larger. Small trials are associated with providing less accurate effect estimates, and may be prone to chance findings. More research using larger samples is required to answer important clinical questions for clinicians, consumers and policy makers in the treatment of acute respiratory diseases.

M3 - Poster

ER -