Type of study based on universal sampling.
1
However, most evidence is derived from cross-sectional studies which frequently yield conflicting results.
2
The majority of studies were medium to high quality cross-sectional studies.
3
Results: There were seven cross-sectional studies and one retrospective study enrolling 1666 participants.
4
Participants: Results from 7 cross-sectional studies were pooled in a meta-analysis.
5
Alcohol intake has been inconsistently associated with lung function levels in cross-sectional studies.
6
A total of nine cross-sectional studies were included in this meta-analysis.
7
A total of twelve cross-sectional studies were included in this meta-analysis.
8
Objective: HIV seroconversion biomarkers are being used in cross-sectional studies for HIV incidence estimation.
9
Design: Data used from two cross-sectional studies repeated in the same community 32 years apart.
10
Background: Recent cross-sectional studies suggested that highest sensitization prevalences occur with moderate cat allergen exposures.
11
Methods: This study is a secondary analysis of existing data gathered from two cross-sectional studies.
12
In relation to HIV, the results of previous observational and cross-sectional studies have been mixed.
13
Design: Samples were obtained from two IRB-approved cross-sectional studies.
14
Multicenter cross-sectional studies were conducted in the rheumatology clinics of 13 Korean tertiary referral hospitals.
15
Background: In cross-sectional studies, elevated plasma homocysteine levels have been associated with poor cognition and dementia.
16
Conclusions: Epidemiologists should consider reporting standardized risk or prevalence ratios and differences in cohort and cross-sectional studies.
