In Defense of Generalists: Primary Care Observations Have Systematic Advantages

References

1. 1.↵
   Oxford English Dictionary, online. Search: “expert” [Internet]. [cited 2024 Jan 13]. Available at: https://www.oed.com/.
2. 2.↵
   1. Starfield B,
   2. Shi L,
   3. Macinko J

   . Contribution of primary care to health systems and health. Milbank Q 2005;83:457–502.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   1. Jimenez G,
   2. Matchar D,
   3. Koh GCH,
   4. et al

   . Revisiting the four core functions (4Cs) of primary care: operational definitions and complexities. Prim Health Care Res Dev 2021;22:e68.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
4. 4.↵
   1. Sackett D,
   2. Rosenberg W,
   3. Gray J,
   4. Haynes R,
   5. Richardson W

   . Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t - it’s about integrating individual clinical expertise and the best external evidence. Br Med J 1996;312:71–2.

   OpenUrlFREE Full Text
5. 5.↵
   1. Hernán MA,
   2. Hernández-Díaz S,
   3. Robins JM

   . A structural approach to selection bias. Epidemiology 2004;15:615–25.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
6. 6.↵
   1. Stovitz SD,
   2. Banack HR,
   3. Kaufman JS

   . “Depletion of the susceptibles” taught through a story, a table and basic arithmetic. BMJ Evid Based Med 2018;23:199–199.

   OpenUrlFREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   1. Renoux C,
   2. Dell'Aniello S,
   3. Brenner B,
   4. Suissa S

   . Bias from depletion of susceptibles: the example of hormone replacement therapy and the risk of venous thromboembolism. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf 2017;26:554–60.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
8. 8.↵
   1. Moride Y,
   2. Abenhaim L,
   3. Yola M,
   4. Lucein A

   . Evidence of the depletion of susceptibles effect in non-experimental pharmacoepidemiologic research. J Clin Epidemiol 1994;47:731–7.

   OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
9. 9.↵
   1. Rasmussen SH,
   2. Andersen-Ranberg K,
   3. Thinggaard M,
   4. et al

   . Cohort profile: the 1895, 1905, 1910 and 1915 Danish Birth Cohort Studies - secular trends in the health and functioning of the very old. Int J Epidemiol 2017;46:1746–1746j.

   OpenUrlPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Levine M,
    2. Crimmins E

    . Not all smokers die young: a model for hidden heterogeneity within the human population. PLOS ONE 2014;9:e87403.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
11. 11.↵
    1. Banack HR,
    2. Kaufman JS,
    3. Wactawski-Wende J,
    4. Troen BR,
    5. Stovitz SD

    . Investigating and remediating selection bias in geriatrics research: the selection bias toolkit. J Am Geriatr Soc 2019;67:1970–6.

    OpenUrlPubMed
12. 12.↵
    1. Banack HR,
    2. Mayeda ER,
    3. Naimi AI,
    4. Fox MP,
    5. Whitcomb BW

    . Collider stratification bias I: principles and structure. Am J Epidemiol 2024;193:238–40.

    OpenUrlPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Hernández-Díaz S,
    2. Schisterman EF,
    3. Hernán MA

    . The birth weight “paradox” uncovered? Am J Epidemiol 2006;164:1115–20.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    1. Tang A,
    2. Ahmad U,
    3. Toth AJ,
    4. et al

    . Non–small cell lung cancer in never- and ever-smokers: is it the same disease? J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2021;161:1903–17.e9.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
15. 15.↵
    1. Liu X,
    2. Byrd JB

    . Cigarette smoking and subtypes of uncontrolled blood pressure among diagnosed hypertensive patients: paradoxical associations and implications. Am J Hypertens 2017;30:602–9.

    OpenUrlPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. Stovitz SD,
    2. Banack HR,
    3. Kaufman JS

    . Paediatric obesity appears to lower the risk of diabetes if selection bias is ignored. J Epidemiol Community Health 2018;72:302–8.

    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
17. 17.↵
    1. Stovitz SD,
    2. Banack HR,
    3. Kaufman JS

    . Structural bias in studies of cardiovascular disease: let’s not be fooled by the “obesity paradox.” Can J Cardiol 2018;34:540–2.

    OpenUrlPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Mannion AF,
    2. Fekete TF,
    3. O'Riordan D,
    4. et al

    . Does loss to follow-up lead to an overestimation of treatment success? Findings from a spine surgery registry of over 15,000 patients. Eur Spine J Off J 2023;32:813–23.

    OpenUrl
19. 19.↵
    1. Murray DW,
    2. Britton AR,
    3. Bulstrode CJ

    . Loss to follow-up matters. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1997;79:254–7.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
20. 20.↵
    1. Howe CJ,
    2. Cole SR,
    3. Lau B,
    4. Napravnik S,
    5. Eron JJ

    . Selection bias due to loss to follow up in cohort studies. Epidemiology 2016;27:91–7.

    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed