False equivalence is a logical fallacy in which two distinct entities, situations, or treatments are presented as if they were equivalent, despite relevant differences that undermine the comparison's validity.

• Superficial similarities mask important underlying differences
• Ignores confounding variables or context
• Often used in observational studies without proper adjustment
• Leads to misleading comparisons and flawed conclusions

• Comparing microsurgical clipping and endovascular treatment of MCA aneurysms as if they were interchangeable, without accounting for aneurysm complexity, morphology, or patient selection bias.

• Encourages inappropriate treatment decisions
• Undermines evidence-based practice
• Distorts systematic reviews or meta-analyses
• Can be used to support biased or agenda-driven interpretations

• Ensure clinical and methodological comparability between groups
• Use stratification, matching, or multivariate adjustment
• Acknowledge and discuss key differences in study limitations