[Skip to Navigation]
Invited Commentary
April 5, 2021

Exploiting Clinical Decision-making Thresholds to Recover Causal Effects From Observational Data: Randomization Without Trials

Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco
  • 2Editorial Fellow, JAMA Internal Medicine
  • 3Department of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
  • 4Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts
  • 5Associate Editor, JAMA Internal Medicine
JAMA Intern Med. 2021;181(6):774-775. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.0923

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) are the gold standard of study design because randomization ensures that differences in outcomes between a treatment and control group reflect the causal effect of treatment. Although RCTs greatly benefit science and society for this reason, they often cannot be conducted because of logistical, ethical, or resource constraints.1 Researchers are thus confronted with many questions left unanswered.

Add or change institution
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words