A prospective cohort study is a higher level of evidence (less prone to bias) than a retrospective cohort study.

Yes, that's correct. A prospective cohort study is generally considered a higher level of evidence than a retrospective cohort study. This is because in a prospective cohort study, the researchers plan the study, recruit participants, and collect baseline data before the participants have developed the outcome of interest. This allows for a more accurate and direct measure of how different exposures or risk factors may influence the outcome.

On the other hand, a retrospective cohort study involves identifying participants who have already experienced the outcome of interest and collecting data from their past records. This can introduce various forms of bias, such as recall bias and selection bias. Furthermore, the quality of the data is dependent on the accuracy and completeness of the records, which may not always be reliable.

Therefore, while both types of studies can provide valuable information, prospective cohort studies are generally less prone to bias and considered a higher level of evidence.