Browse every published article, from the latest research to earlier analysis. Use the page numbers below to explore the complete archive.
A professional-group prescribing study cannot determine fitness for work from exposure history alone.
Theoretical removal predictions can differ from measured concentrations in severe illness.
A population model can describe average covariate effects without eliminating individual variability.
Reduction and complete discontinuation should not be treated as the same stated goal.
A significant change within one group does not prove a significant advantage over another group.
More of one sedative did not improve every measured outcome.
Declining use of one sedative class does not establish declining combined medication burden.
A synthesis cannot supply equally strong evidence for every drug pair when few studies test each pair.
A successful later procedure does not make two anesthetic episodes controlled equivalents.
Better early comfort scores do not establish long-term neurological safety.
Similarity between two active strategies cannot establish how either compares with no added drug.
Recovery speed and delirium incidence need not move together.
One label of co-use can conceal different exposure histories.
A prescribing sequence is not proof of misuse or substitution intent.
A strong reporting signal does not supply the percentage of exposed patients harmed.
Reversal of sedation does not mean the underlying critical illness has resolved.
A respiratory advantage under one protocol should retain its comparator and monitoring conditions.
A favorable event comparison can coexist with important baseline imbalance.
A lower benzodiazepine requirement can reflect the contribution of another depressant.
A study estimating later fall risk may deliberately exclude the earliest falls, changing the population to which its results apply.
A pharmacokinetic bridge and an open-label effectiveness proxy supply different evidence.
A definitive method is definitive only within its validated scope.
A second-line benefit is conditional on the experimental sequence.
An association sensitive to analysis design needs that uncertainty preserved.
One rating advantage can coexist with similar practical outcomes and slower emergence.
A sedation study’s motivation is not the same as its measured endpoint.
A proportion among new users is not the prevalence among everyone with depression.
A negative model finding does not establish that benzodiazepine withdrawal cannot occur.
Matching a target score does not make different sedative regimens identical.
A decline in a combined category can conceal continued use of particular medicines.