Write a Comment

jlportol

Observational studies are important when RCT cannot be performed or have not been performed yet, as is the case. This study was done in subjects with a long follow-up (up to 8 years) not seen in RCT and suggests that inflammation increases after 3 years from ART switch and potential confounders were well controlled using sound methods. The study fuels an interesting and pertinent debate and was not interpreted as confirmatory.

July 14, 2020 • Paris

AlertReader

The above study is a perfect example how research results can cause confusion if improperly interpreted/presented. A retrospective, observational study can never answer the question whether interventions differ in relevant outcome measures. The study causes unnecessary confusion (unless patients were randomized) rather than contribute to this important research topic. The focus should be that these results are at best preliminary and await confirmation/rejection in adequately designed trials.

July 8, 2020