Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 22, 2026

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases
Published on: October 24, 2019
If it is published in the peer-reviewed literature, it must be true?
1Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Imaging, The University of Texas - Houston Medical School, 6431 Fannin St, MSB 2.130B, Houston, TX, 77030, USA, Louis.K.Wagner@uth.tmc.edu.
Abstract:
Epidemiological research correlating cancer rates in a population of patients with radiation doses from medical X-rays is fraught with confounding factors that obfuscate the likelihood that any positive relationship is causal. This is a review of four studies involving some of those confounding factors. Comparisons of findings with other studies not encumbered by similar confounding factors can enhance assertions of causation between medical X-rays and cancer rates. Even so, such assertions rest significantly on opinions of researchers regarding the degree of consistency between findings among various studies. The question as to what degree any findings truly represent cause and effect will likely still meet with controversy. The importance of these findings to medicine should therefore not lie in any controversy regarding causation, but in what the findings potentially mean with regard to benefit and risk for patients and the professional practice of medicine.
Related Concept Videos
Proofreading
The Scientific Method
Generally, predictions are tested using carefully-designed experiments. Based on the outcome of these...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Social Proof
Purpose of Health Records I
Here's a breakdown of how health records serve these purposes:
Scientific Nature of Social Psychology