Epidemiologic research using administrative databases: garbage in, garbage out.

@article{Lidegaard2011EpidemiologicRU,
  title={Epidemiologic research using administrative databases: garbage in, garbage out.},
  author={\Ojvind Lidegaard},
  journal={Obstetrics and gynecology},
  year={2011},
  volume={117 2 Pt 1},
  pages={410-1; author reply 411}
}
tears of the external anal sphincter, and were ineligible for inclusion. Of the remaining three patients in the overlapping group who were excluded, one actually had an intact external anal sphincter below a large second-degree tear, and two had previous third-degree tears. None of these patients should have been randomized, and none of them received the randomization treatment. We would argue that the only way a bias could have been introduced is if there were ineligible patients who were… CONTINUE READING